“We need to fix our City-Systems to fix our Cities” · Executive Summary ... N R Narayana...

3

Foreword.....................................................................................................................

Event Highlights .......................................................................................................

Profiles ........................................................................................................................

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems

Executive Summary ..................................................................................

Critical Action Points for Indian Cities ...............................................

City Performance Snapshots ..................................................................

Methodology ................................................................................................

Voice of India’s Citizens (VOICE) Survey

Executive Summary ...................................................................................

Methodology ................................................................................................

Data Book

Curtain Raiser of Scores ..........................................................................

Category Scores ..........................................................................................

Classification of ASICS Questions .........................................................

The ASICS 2013 Scorecard ......................................................................

ASICS 2013 Benchmark - NYC ................................................................

ASICS 2013 Benchmark - London .........................................................

Explanatory Schedules .............................................................................

VOICE Survey: Results ...............................................................................

List of Legislations .....................................................................................

5

6

8

12

17

21

33

36

40

42

43

44

45

46

54

57

60

68

72

Table of Contents

“We need to fix our City-Systems to fix our Cities”

5

There can be no disagreement with the view that our cities need urgent attention

– roads, traffic, garbage, power, water-supply, environment, crime, safety and

the whole gamut of Quality of Life aspects about which we experience daily

frustrations as city-residents. But these are only the symptoms. They are visible

elements of a systemic failure in the governance and management of our cities.

Any number of band-aids cannot prevent the malaise from spreading, unless the

underlying structural deficiency is treated. But governing and managing cities is

complicated – throw a stone in any direction at any distance and it hits an obstacle.

Figuring out a way by which the challenges of cities can be distilled into a frame of

reference, will align action towards coherent change.

We call this a City-Systems framework and propose viewing the challenges of our

cities through the lens of such a framework, with four defining aspects. These four

aspects in our view are the building blocks for transforming our cities and creating

a more sustainable future for growth. The City-Systems framework is depicted as

a metamorphosing butterfly with the wings representing the four parts of the City-

System.

We need to fix our City-Systems to fix our Cities.

The Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems derives its inspiration from this

framework. It is an objective measure of the state of our City-Systems, benchmarked

against City-Systems of some of the best cities of the world. The Voice of India’s

Citizens (VOICE) survey complements ASICS by doing a reality check with what

citizens perceive and desire. It is our belief that over time this City-Systems Survey

will become a powerful indicator to measure the political vision and government

leadership in our individual cities.

We hope you find the insights from this edition of the Annual Survey of India’s City-

Systems a valuable way to think about transforming our cities.

Foreword

Swati Ramanathan

Co-founders

Ramesh Ramanathan

6

Event Highlights

Thursday, April 4th, 2013atRoyal Ball Room, The ImperialJanpath, New Delhi

• Key Note speeches by Global Experts

• Conversations between Global Experts and Jury members

• Results of Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems and

Voice of India’s Citizens (VOICE) Survey

• Distribution of VOICE Trophies

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New York

Chief Guest

Ajay MakenUnion Minister for Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation

Chair of the Jury

Arun MairaMember, Planning Commission of India

Jury Member

Baijayant PandaMember of Parliament

Jury Member

Adi GodrejChairman, Godrej Group

Awards Designed by

7

Jury Member

Dr M RamachandranFormer Secretary, Government of India

Jury Member

Ireena VittalFormer Partner, Mckinsey & Co. and Independent Director

Global Expert

Liu Thai KerFormer Chief Executive and Chief Planner, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority

Global Expert

Victor VergaraLead Urban Specialist, World Bank Institute

Global Expert

David BeckerDirector, Election Initiatives, The Pew Charitable Trusts

Closing Remarks by

N R Narayana MurthyChairman Emeritus, Infosys Limited

Awards Designed by

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New York

8

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New York

Profiles(in alphabetical order of first names)

Ajay MakenUnion Minister for Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation

Arun MairaMember, Planning Commission of India

Adi GodrejChairman, Godrej Group

Ajay Maken is Union Minister for Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, Government of India and Member of Parliament from New Delhi. He was instrumental in the creation of the Master Plan for New Delhi (MPD-2021)and is credited with transition of Delhi’s Public Transport to CNG that subsequently earned New Delhi the UN Clean City award for Environment. Mr Maken also holds the distinction of becoming India’s youngest Speaker of a Legislative Assembly.

Adi Godrej is Chairman of the Godrej Group, one of India’s oldest, largest and most respected business houses. Over the last five decades, Mr Godrej has played an important role in the development of a variety of industries in India by leading key organizations of trade and commerce. He is currently President of the Confederation of Indian Industry. Mr Godrej has participated actively in the field of management education as Chairman of the Board of Indian School of Business and as a former member of the Dean’s Advisory Council of the MIT Sloan School of Management and the Wharton Asian Executive Board. He is also an active philanthropist.

Arun Maira is Member of the Planning Commission chaired by the Prime Minister of India. In this Ministerial level position, he is responsible for facilitating the shaping of policies and programs related to industrialization, urbanization and tourism. Prior to his appointment to the Planning Commission, Mr Maira was the Chairman of Boston Consulting Group in India and has served on the boards of several large Indian companies. He has authored several books, which include “Shaping The Future: Aspirational Leadership in India and Beyond”, “Remaking India: One Country, One Destiny”, “Discordant Democrats: Five Steps to Consensus” and “Transforming Capitalism: Business Leadership to Improve the World for Everyone”.

9

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New YorkIreena VittalFormer Partner, Mckinsey & Co. and Independent Director

David BeckerDirector, Election Initiatives, The Pew Charitable Trusts

Baijayant PandaMember of Parliament

Baijayant “Jay” Panda is a Member of Parliament from Kendrapara Lok Sabha Constituency in Odisha. Mr Panda is Chairman of the India-USA Forum of Parliamentarians and has been associated with the Citizens’ Alliance Against Malnutrition, an advocacy group. In 2008, he received the award for best parliamentary practices from the Chief Justice of India. He has been a member of the Parliamentary Committees on Energy, Urban Development, Home, Commerce and Human Resource Development. Mr Panda graduated from the Michigan Technological University and with a background in Engineering and Management worked in the corporate sector before joining politics.

David Becker is Director of Election initiatives, The Pew Charitable Trusts. He supervises Pew’s portfolio of work in election administration in the United States including research and reform efforts to upgrade voter registration systems. Before joining Pew, Mr Becker as senior trial attorney led numerous investigations into violations of federal voting laws in the United States of America. He also helped direct Department of Justice Policy on enforcing the Help America Vote Act. Mr Becker graduated in Law from University of California, Berkeley.

Ireena Vittal was Partner, McKinsey & Co. where she worked for more than fifteen years and is currently an independent director on the boards of some of India’s best known companies. She co-authored McKinsey Global Institute’s report titled ‘‘India’s Urban Awakening: Building Inclusive Cities; Sustaining Economic Growth”. Ms Vittal is among India’s premier experts on the Retail business. She received her Masters in Business Administration from Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta.

10

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New York

N R Narayana MurthyChairman Emeritus, Infosys Limited

Liu Thai KerFormer Chief Executive and Chief Planner, Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority

Dr Liu Thai-Ker is a planner architect. Since 1992, he has been the Director of RSP Architects Planners & Engineers Pte Ltd, Singapore. He is a member of several government bodies in Singapore, and planning advisor to over 20 cities in China. As architect-planner and Chief Executive Officer of the Housing & Development Board during 1969 to 1989, he oversaw the completion of over half a million dwelling units in Singapore. As Chief Executive Officer and Chief Planner of the Singapore Urban Redevelopment Authority during 1989 to 1992, he spearheaded the major revision of the Singapore Concept Plan that is widely recognised as visionary, pragmatic and one which will contribute towards making Singapore a city of excellence. Dr Liu obtained Masters in City Planning with Parson’s Memorial Medal from Yale University in 1965. In 1995, he was conferred Doctor of Science honoris causa by the University of New South Wales. In his illustrious career, he has won several awards including the Public Administration Medal (Gold) 1976, the Meritorious Service Medal 1985, Singapore Institute of Architects Gold Medal and the Medal of the City of Paris, France in 2001.

NR Narayana Murthy is the Founder of Infosys Limited, a global software consulting company headquartered in Bangalore, India. He founded Infosys in 1981, served as its Chief Executive Officer until 2002, and as Chairman and Chief Mentor until 2011. He is currently Chairman Emeritus of Infosys. Mr Murthy articulated, designed and implemented the Global Delivery Model which has become the foundation for the huge success of Information Technology services outsourcing from India. He has also led key corporate governance initiatives in India. He serves on the boards of Ford Foundation, Rhodes Trust, the Indian School of Business and the UN Foundation. Mr Murthy was listed as one among the “12 greatest entrepreneurs of our time” by the Fortune magazine in 2012. The Economist ranked him among the ten most-admired global business leaders in 2005. He has been awarded the Padma Vibhushan by the Government of India, the Legion d’honneur by the Government of France, and the CBE by the British government.

11

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Chennai

Delhi

Hyderabad

Jaipur

Kanpur

Kolkata

Mumbai

Pune

Surat

––––––––––

London

New York

Victor VergaraLead Urban Specialist, World Bank Institute

Dr M RamachandranFormer Secretary, Government of India

Dr M Ramachandran has had a distinguished career of 38 years in the Indian Administrative Service during which period he has held various important assignments such as Chief Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand and Secretary to Government of India in the Ministry of Urban Development. During his tenure as India’s Urban Development Secretary, various new initiatives such as the National Urban Transport Policy, National Urban Sanitation Policy, credit rating of major cities, introduction of Bus Rapid Transit system in ten cities, sanitation rating of cities and introduction of Service Level Benchmarks for six urban services were undertaken. He was member of the committees which structured India’s urban strategy for the current Twelfth Five Year Plan and the next phase of the Urban renewal mission. He has authored six books, mostly on urban and infrastructure issues. He writes regularly on urban matters in national economic dailies.

Victor Vergara is Lead Urban Specialist at the World Bank Institute. He joined the World Bank Urban Department in 1991 where among other things he led preparation of urban planning and management capacity building initiatives in Mexico, Guatemala, Venezuela and Peru. In 1998, Mr Vergara joined the World Bank Institute where he managed the urban development practice. As an urban planner, he championed work to promote municipal planning institutes, participatory municipal budgeting and sustainable land use planning. In 2009 Mr Vergara joined the East Asia Pacific (EAP) region as urban practice leader where he led the technical review of operational, analytical and advisory services as well as managing urban development projects in China. He facilitated communities of practice on urban waterfront renewal, land use planning, housing, and slum upgrading. He is the co-chair of the World Bank’s housing and land thematic group. Mr Vergara holds a Masters in City Planning from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Masters in Agriculture from Texas A&M University.

12

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems: Executive Summary

1. Indian cities have scored across a range of 0.7 to 4.5 on a scale of 0 to 10, across all four categories. In comparison, New York (NY) and London (Lon) have scored between 8.1 and 9.9 on the same scale.

2. Average scores of Indian cities in each of the four categories is range bound between 2.2 and 3.4. However, there are wide variations in scores between cities within each category.

3. Cities also have tended to be strong in certain areas and weak in others.

Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NYC Lon

Urban Planning and Design (UPD) 2.5 2.9 2.2 3.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 4.2 2.6 0.7 2.5 8.8 8.8

Urban Capacities and Resources (UCR) 2.5 0.9 2.2 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 9.9 8.1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation (ELPR) 3.2 1.9 4.1 2.2 2.6 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 9.4 9.3

Transparency, Accountability and Participation (TAP) 1.5 3.0 2.9 1.2 4.4 1.2 3.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.4 8.9 8.1

Notes:

Delhi has been reckoned prior to trifurcation of Municipal Corporation of Delhi into three Municipal Corporations. New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) is not considered for this purpose. In the case of London, Greater London Authority (GLA) has been considered.

Legend:

Ahd-Ahmedabad, Blr-Bengaluru, Che-Chennai, Del-Delhi, Hyd-Hyderabad, Jpr-Jaipur, Kpr-Kanpur, Kol-Kolkata, Mum-Mumbai, Pun-Pune, Sur-Surat, NYC-New York City, Lon-London.

13

Urban Planning and Design

4. While Indian cities generally have Metropolitan and Municipal Spatial Development Plans, with the exception of Delhi, no other city has Ward Development Plans, which are crucial for sub-local and neighbourhood level planning.

5. Preparation of Spatial Plans is however neither preceded by structured citizen participation nor followed by long-term financial projection for the Urban Local Body (ULB) ), based on which the ULB can in turn draw up Medium Term Fiscal Plans and Annual Budgets.

6. Metropolitan Planning Committees (MPC) mandated by the Constitution of India are conspicuous by their absence across cities, spread across eight states, with the lone exception of Kolkata. In addition to constituting the MPC, Kolkata has ensured institution of sectoral and executive committees under the MPC, which is a best practice.

7. The absence of guaranteed land titling, weak institutional structures such as lack of a single base map across civic agencies and lack of authority of ULBs for approving land-use change are other factors which together account for weak urban planning and design in Indian cities.

14

Urban Capacities and Resources

8. Urban Capacities and Resources is the category with the lowest average score for Indian cities. This is principally on account of

a. Low degrees of financial decentralisation including limited borrowing powers, powers to set and collect a very limited number of taxes resulting in low per capita capital expenditure;

b. Low levels of staffing when compared to population, compounded with limited powers in respect of the human resource management function; and

c. A total absence of institutional mechanisms that would empower the ULB to manage its affairs efficiently and effectively such as performance management systems, robust digital governance, emergency management systems and most importantly appropriate supervisory powers with respect to functioning of other civic agencies operating in its jurisdiction. The absence of long-term or medium-term fiscal plans has also impaired the ability of ULBs to manage their finances with a long-term perspective.

In comparison, especially in respect of human resources and institutional capacities, New York and London have recorded significantly higher scores.

9. A positive in this category has been that States have duly constituted State Finance Commissions (SFCs) that are tasked with reviewing and recommending sharing of revenues between the State and Local Bodies and distribution of the same between Local Bodies. However SFCs have not always been constituted every five years as required by the Constitution and their reports, barring Jaipur, have not been placed on time before the State Legislatures.

15

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation

10. City Councils need to be both empowered and legitimate to meaningfully discharge their role as local self-governments. ‘Empowered’ connotes having the necessary authority, functions and powers and ‘legitimate’ implies elected representatives need to appropriately reflect public sentiment and be able to understand, channelize and fulfil citizen aspirations for their cities.

11. Indian cities have weak Mayors and Councils. The Mayor is directly elected only in three out of the eleven cities surveyed and has less than a five-year term in six cities. In Bangalore, the term of the Mayor is an incredulous one year. Even where the Mayor is directly elected, power to appoint the Municipal Commissioner does not vest in the Mayor.

12. Similarly, the Council and the ULB handle very few critical functions. Out of a select ten critical functions, all from the Schedule XII to the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 and recommendations of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (SARC), the best Indian city in this respect handles only five. In comparison, New York and London handle all ten.

13. Further, as an indicator of legitimacy of Councillors, there is no robust policy to regulate and mandate public disclosure of conflicts of interests. Related party interests, relationships and transactions are not required to be disclosed in a regular and systematic manner in any Indian city.

16

Transparency, Accountability and Participation

14. This category has three distinct components, transparency, accountability and citizen participation.

Transparency 15. Indian cities are ‘closed’. The quality of ULB websites and the absence of an

enlightened Open Data framework are the principal causes. However green shoots have appeared with seven out of eleven cities being covered by Public Disclosure Laws and six of them also notifying rules thereunder.

Accountability

16. Indian cities fare very poorly in the realm of public accountability on multiple counts. Be it the absence of a local government ombudsman, or audit and accounts related accountability mechanisms, no Indian city scores creditably.

Participation

17. Hyderabad stands out as the lone champion of citizen participation among Indian cities, having enacted the Community Participation Law in substance as evidenced by functioning Area Sabhas.

17

ASI

CS Q

No.

QuestionsA

hd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

Urban Planning and DesignII Spatial Plans

3Create the following Spatial Plans , which together form an Integrated Regional Spatial Plan for the Metropolitan Area (MA)

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan a a a a a a a a a r a NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan a a a a a a a a a a a a a

iii Ward Development Plan r r r a r r r r r r r a a

4 Ensure proper duration for Spatial Plans in the MA

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan- 20-25 Years a a r a a a a a a r a NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan- 20-25 Years a a r a a a a a a r a a a

iii Ward Development Plan- 5 years r r r a r r r r r r r r a

5 Ensure Plans across hierarchy are notified without time-lag

i Between Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan and Munici-pal Spatial Development Plan. a r a a a a a a a r a NA NA

ii Between Municipal Spatial Development Plan and Ward Development Plan. r r r r r r r r r r r a a

6 Ensure lower-level Plans are in compliance with higher level Plans

i Municipal Spatial Development Plan to be compliant with the Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan. a a a a a a a a a r a NA NA

ii Ward Development Plan to be compliant with the Municipal Spatial Development Plan? r r r a r r r r r r r a a

7

Mandate citizen participation in the preparation of Metropoli-tan and Municipal Spatial Development Plans through provi-sions to that effect in the State Town and Country Planning (T and CP) Act or the Urban Development Authority (DA) Act.

r r r r r r r r r r r NA NA

8Include disclosure of the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spa-tial Development Plan in the public domain as a mandatory requirement in the State Public Disclosure Law (PDL).

r a a r a r a r r r r a a

9 Mandate full disclosure of plan violations in the public do-main under State T and CP Act or the DA Act. r r r r r r r r r r r r r

10

Create a long-term financial projection for the constituent Urban Local Bodies (ULB) of the MA drawn-up based on the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spatial Development Plans and allied infrastructure requirements, and in turn ensure that ULB's prepare medium-term fiscal plans and annual budgets based on such projection.

r r r r r r r r r r r a a

III Metropolitan Planning Committee

11Constitute Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) as re-quired by Article 243 ZE of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 (74th CAA).

r r r r r r r a r r r NA NA

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems:Critical Action Points for Indian Cities

r Critical Action Point

a No Critical Action required

18

ASI

CS Q

No.

Questions

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

14 Convert Regional Development Authority/ Development Authority into technical and administrative arm of the MPC. r r r r r r r a r r r NA NA

15

Establish sectoral committees and an executive committee in the MPC, with sectoral committees tasked with drawing up of sectoral plans derived from the Metropolitan Plan, and the executive committee tasked with consolidating and integrat-ing such sectoral plans.

r r r r r r r a r r r NA NA

16

Empower Ward Committees, the ULB and the MPC with plan enforcement, with an appellate structure where the ULB and the MPC act as appellate authorities for appeals against deci-sions of the Ward Committees and ULBs respectively.


IV Institutional Structures and Powers17 Create the following specialised bodies/agencies for the MA

i Spatial Data Centre a a a a a a a a a r a a r

ii Transit Authority r a a a a r r r a r r a a

iii Environment Cell a a a a a a a a a r a a a

iv Heritage Authority r r r r r a r a a r r r a

v Economic and Statistical Data Authority r r r r r r r r r r r a a

18 Ensure creation and usage of a single base map for the MA that is used by all the civic service providers in the MA r r r r r r r r r r r a r

19Empower the ULB with the authority to permit land-use change in consonance with the Municipal Spatial Develop-ment Plan


V Guaranteed Land Title

20 Legislate implementation of Guaranteed Land Titling in the MA/ULB r r r r r r r r r r r a a

21 Create a Land Titling Authority under such law r r r r r r r r r r r a a

Urban Capacities and ResourcesI Finance1 Endow the ULB with enhanced powers of taxation. r r a r r a r r r r r a r

2 Significantly enhance Per Capita Capital Spending in the MA in general and of the ULB in particular. r r r r r r r r r r r a a

3 Permit ULB to raise borrowings and access capital markets without State Government/ Central Government approval r r r r r r r r r r r a a

4Permit the ULB to make investments or otherwise apply surplus funds without specific State Government/ Central Government approval.

a r r a a r a r a a a a a

5

Implement a system of providing specific relief to the ULB in lieu of civic service delivery commitments arising out of transport/ other major infrastructure created in its area of jurisdiction by State Government/Central Government or other parastatal agencies (e.g. metro rail, business districts/parks etc.)

r r r r r a r r r r r NA NA

6 Liberate the ULB from seeking State Government for its An-nual Budgets a r a a a r r a a a a a a

8 Constitute State Finance Commissions (SFC) on time with an interval of five years each r r r r r r r r r r r NA NA

9Place the Action Taken Reports of SFCs before the state legislature before the expiry of six months from the date of submission of the report.

r r r r r a r r r r r NA NA

10 Legislate for the ULB to have a Long-Term and/or Medium-Term Fiscal Plan. r r r r r r r r r r r a a

II Human Resources

11 Devolve following authorities in respect of Human Resource management to the ULB

19

ASI

CS Q

No.

Questions

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

i Appointment a r a a r r a a a a a a a

ii Promotion r r r r r r r r r r r a a

iii Disciplinary Action a r a a r r a a a a a a a

iv Termination a r a a r r a a a a a a a

v Incentivisation r r r r r r r r r r r r r

12 Strengthen manpower adequacy of the ULB r r r a r r r r a r r a a

III Institutional Structures and Powers

13

Install an institutional mechanism that empowers the ULB to control, manage, supervise, intervene in or veto crucial decisions of other parastatal/civic agencies in respect of their operations in its jurisdiction in so far as they impact citizens and Quality of Life


14

Put in place a Performance Management Information System/alternate decision-support system in the ULB that institution-alises performance based reviews of/decisions in respect of finances and operations?


15 Conceive a Digital Governance Roadmap r r r r r r r r r r r a a

16 Put in place an incident/emergency management system r r r r r r r r r r r a a

Empowered and Legitimate Political RepresentationI State Election Commission

2 Empower the SEC to decide in matters of electoral delimita-tion of the ULB/Council r r r r r r r a a a r a a

3 Empower the SEC in respect of reservation and rotation of seats in the Council a r r r r r r a a a a NA NA

II Mayor4 Extend term of the Mayor of the ULB to five years r r a r a a a a r r r a a

5 Implement Direct Election of the Mayor r r a r r a a r r r r a a

6 Empower the Mayor/Council to recruit and appoint the Mu-nicipal Commissioner/Chief Executive of the ULB r r r r r r r r r r r a a

III Council

7

Devolve to the ULB critical functions and services out of the eighteen functions and services listed under Schedule XII of the 74th CAA and recommendations of the SARC, making it a meaningful local self-government.


9Mandate systematic and periodic public disclosure of related party interests, relationships and transactions in respect of Councillors


Transparency, Accountability and ParticipationI Transparency1 Enact PDL. r a a r a r a a a a r a a

2 Notify Rules implementing/giving force to the PDL. r a a r a r a r a a r NA NA

3 Make the ULB's website comprehensive and a vehicle for robust Government to Citizen connect. r r r r r r r r r r r a a

4

Subscribe to and implement an Open Data policy or frame-work whereby all financial and operational records of the ULB are made easily accessible to the public through suo motu disclosures, including in electronic form on their websites.


II Accountability

5Constitute a Local Government Ombudsman in the State, who is inter alia authorised to investigate corruption and resolve inter-agency disputes.


20

ASI

CS Q

No.

QuestionsA

hd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

8Mandate by law the completion and disclosure of the Audit of the ULB's Annual Accounts, within six months of the end of a financial year.

r r r r r r r r r r r a r

9 Mandate by law responses to observations raised by ULB's auditors by the ULB within a specified time period. r a a r r r r r r r r r a

10 Legislate for responses to Auditors' observations to be placed before the Council/State Legislature? r r a r r a r r r r r r a

11Make Internal Audit of the ULB within a predetermined fre-quency, at least annual, a mandatory requirement under the governing legislation.

a r r a a r a a a a a a a

12Institutionalise through appropriate legal provisions public consultations/systematic citizen participation in the Annual Budget preparation process of the ULB.


13Enact a Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management law for the ULB or appropriately amend governing legislation to provide for equivalent measures.


14Draw up a Citizens' Charter that has target levels of service, timelines and procedure for relief if target service levels are not met.

r r r r a r a a r a r a r

17

Create and maintain in the ULB a comprehensive database of approvals, certificates and permits granted/issued, which in turn can be shared with the Metropolitan Economic and Statistical Data Authority, to enable informed planning.


18 Implement an e-procurement system (including vendor registration) in the ULB. r a r r r r r r a a r a a

19 Disclose on its website and widely disseminate the Audited Annual Financial Statements of the ULB. r r r r r r r r a r r a a

III Citizen Participation20 Enact Community Participation Law (CPL). r a a r a r a a a a r NA NA

21 Notify Rules implementing/giving force to the CPL. r r r r a r a a r r r NA NA

22 Constitute Ward Committees for all wards of the ULB. r r r r a r a a r r r a a

23 Constitute Area Sabhas for all wards of the ULB. r r r r a r r r r r r NA NA

24

Institute a systematic citizen engagement program to harness the spirit of volunteerism among citizens of a ULB and provide opportunities for citizens to participate in the process of improving the Quality of Life in their cities, thereby also fostering a spirit of community and citizenship.


21

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems:City Performance Snapshots

1. Ahmedabad

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 8 4 7 8

City-System +/- Snapshot

ELPR + Highest score among Indian cities in number of critical functions handled.

ELPR - Weak Mayor with no direct election, no five year term or the power to appoint Municipal Commissioner

TAP - No Public Disclosure Law, No Community Participation Law resulting in low levels of transparency and participation

ASICS Snapshots

22

2. Bangalore

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 3 11 11 5

ASICS Snapshots


UCR -Low access to and weak control over Finances and Human Resources e.g. annual budget requires State Government approval, no borrowing powers

ELPR - Least number of critical functions handled by the Council/ULB

ELPR - Mayor has one year term

23

3. Chennai

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 10 7 3 6

ASICS Snapshots


UCR - Very Low per capita Capital Spending, less than Rs 1,000 (c. USD 20)

ELPR +/- Directly elected Mayor with five year term, least number of critical functions handled by the Council/ULB

24

4. Delhi

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 2 1 10 10

ASICS Snapshots


UPD - Only city in India to put in place Ward Development Plans

UCR + Significantly higher staff adequacy compared to other Indian cities

TAP - The only city among the top six cities in India not to have enacted Public Disclosure and Community Participation Laws

25

5. Hyderabad

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 3 8 9 1

ASICS Snapshots


UCR -Low levels of staff adequacy in the ULB, with approximately 400 staff per 100,000 citizens, compounded by weak powers to recruit, appoint and incentivise them.

UCR - Along with Chennai, has among the lowest per capita Capital Spending

ELPR +/- Mayor has a five year term but not directly elected and no powers to appoint Municipal Commissioner

TAP + Only Indian city to have functioning Area Sabhas.

26

6. Jaipur

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 7 6 1 11

ASICS Snapshots


UCR + Only Indian city to place Action Taken Report (ATR) on State Finance Commission (SFC) recommendations within six months of SFC report

UCR +Only Indian city to have a relatively structured mechanism of fund transfers from Development Authority for land sales within its jurisdiction

UCR +/-Relative strong powers over taxation (property, profession, advertisement), but inadequate budget size as evidenced by lowest per capita Capital spending (approximately Rs 350, less than USD 10)

TAP - One of the four Indian cities not to have both Community Participation Law and Public Disclosure Law

27

7. Kanpur

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 5 10 4 4

ASICS Snapshots


UCR - Weak taxation powers (only property tax), low levels of per capita capital spending

UCR - Staff adequacy second lowest among Indian cities

ELPR - Lowest in functional decentralisation along with Bangalore and Chennai

TAP + Both Public Disclosure Law and Community Participation Law enacted

28

8. Kolkata

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 1 9 2 7

ASICS Snapshots


UPD + Only Indian city to have a Metropolitan Planning Committee

UCR - Relatively weak powers of taxation, borrowings and low per capita Capital spending

ELPR +Along with Mumbai and Pune, one of the few cities to have an independent and empowered State Election Commission, responsible for delimitation and reservation of/in the ULB

TAP - Weak Public Disclosure Law

29

9. Mumbai

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 6 2 6 2

ASICS Snapshots


UPD - Supposed to have put in place a Metropolitan Planning Committee, but currently dysfunctional

UCR + Relatively strong management capacities- across financial and human resources

30

10. Pune

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 11 3 5 3

ASICS Snapshots


UPD -Only Indian city not to be covered by a Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan; consequently absence of institutional structures for planning

UCR -/+ Weak powers of taxation but relatively better per capita Capital Spending and staff adequacy, compared to other Indian cities (UCR)

ELPR - Relatively weak Mayor, without five year term, direct election and authorities.

31

11. Surat

UPD UCR ELPR TAP

Rank 8 5 8 9

ASICS Snapshots


ELPR + Highest score among Indian cities in number of critical functions handled

ELPR - Weak Mayor with no direct election, no five year term or the power to appoint Municipal Commissioner

TAP - No Public Disclosure Law, No Community Participation Law resulting in low levels of transparency and participation

32

This page is intentionally left blank

33

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems:Methodology

1. Introduction

The Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems (ASICS) is an objective measure of the state of City-Systems of Indian cities. The Survey is based on a checklist of over seventy main questions covering over a hundred parameters in total, across the four parts of the City-Systems framework- Urban Planning and Design, Urban Capacities and Resources, Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation and Transparency, Accountability and Participation.

One of the unique features of ASICS is that rather than evaluating Quality of Life symptoms such as quality of roads, traffic and transport, cleanliness of roads, quality and quantity of water supply, flooding, pollution control etc., it evaluates Quality of City-Systems; City-Systems being the underlying root causes of the Quality of Life symptoms we experience as city-residents.

Therefore, the focus of ASICS is primarily on laws, policies, institutional processes and implementation of all of these, specifically relating to City-Systems. A break-down of ASICS questions across the four parts of City-Systems is given below.

2. Choice of Cities Indian cities were chosen based on their population as per Census 2011. Coverage of States and geographical coverage across India was an additional consideration. Kanpur was added to the list of top ten cities on this basis. Please refer Databook section for population and area of ULBs selected.

Global cities were chosen to serve as benchmarks. New York and London emerged as natural best-fits as global and vibrant cities belonging to strong democracies and having population that is relatively comparable with that of the selected Indian cities.

3. Categories and Questions

i. Categories

Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems draws inspiration from Janaagraha’s

City-Systems Policy and Institution

Process and Implementation Total Parameters

Urban Planning and Design 13 8 21 36

Urban Capacities and Resources 7 9 16 25

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 9 1 10 10

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 11 13 24 36

Total 40 31 71 107

34

four-part framework of City-Systems. Therefore the categories are each of the four parts of the City-Systems framework.

ii. Questions

a. The overarching approach to selection of questions was to identify significant areas of challenges in City-Systems or crucial topics under each of the four parts of the framework and drill down further into their constituent issues. E.g. Spatial Development Plans are a fundamental requirement for robust urban planning and design. Existence, hierarchy, timeliness, compliance etc. are different attributes or aspects of Spatial Plans that have a bearing on the spatial development of a city. Questions relating to the same challenge areas or crucial topics have been grouped together into sub-categories for better analysis. Please refer ‘Explanatory Schedules’ section for list of sub-categories and corresponding number of questions and parameters.

b. Questions drawn up based on the above approach were subject to an iterative process of internal deliberations and consultations with select domain experts of national eminence, simultaneously drawing from Janaagraha’s work on urban governance and policy reforms in the last decade.

c. Significant provisions of Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act, 1992, Report of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission and Report of the Thirteenth Finance Commission have been considered. Global trends in governance such as Open Data that are equally and seamlessly applicable in the Indian context have been incorporated as well.

d. A conscious attempt has been made to ensure a reasonable mix of questions relating to laws, policies and resultant institutions on one hand and institutional processes and systemic implementation issues on the other.

4. Sources

Responses to Survey questions were sourced predominantly from the following:

1. Municipal Corporation Acts

2. State Town and Country Planning Acts or Development Authority Acts

3. Expert Opinion, specifically on Urban Planning and Design

4. Report of the Thirteenth Finance Commission

5. Reports of State Finance Commissions

6. Websites of Municipal Corporations

7. Reports of multilateral agencies

8. Scoring as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012

9. Press articles, enquiries of ULB personnel and other sources from the internet.

Full list of legislations referred to in the course of our research has been provided in

35

the Data book section. Please write to us at [email protected] for details on sources referred for specific questions of ASICS by city.

5. Scoring

Each question is generally scored on a scale of zero to ten, with ten being the maximum. Weighted questions have twice the general score and multiple parameters within the same question have scores that together add upto ten or twenty depending on whether the question is weighted or not.

All questions are objective in nature and therefore the scoring is straightforward in all cases. There are few questions that required some basic computation in which the computed values are measured against a common base for all cities to arrive at their scores on ten/twenty.

Please refer Databook section for the detailed ASICS questionnaire that carries details of scoring formula for each question, and Explanatory Schedules for basis of computations for specific questions.

6. Weightages

All four parts of the City-Systems framework have been accorded equal weightage. Each of the four parts of the framework is equally important as a City-System, for a city to achieve best-in-class Quality of Life. Further there are strong synergies between one or more parts, which are critical success factors.

Within each part however, certain questions have been identified for weighting of two times, given their relative significance.

7. Period of Evaluation

The evaluation was carried out over a period of twelve months upto January 2013. Reasonable attempts have been made to ensure that information compiled earlier on during this period have been updated for changes, if any.

36

Voice of India’s Citizens (VOICE) Survey: Executive Summary

The Voice of India’s Citizens (VOICE) Survey is a part of the Annual Survey of India’s City-Systems (ASICS). It comprises a detailed survey across the eleven Indian cities covered under ASICS principally on citizens’ perception of

1. Quality of Life in their cities

2. Quality of City-Systems in their cities

3. Impact of Quality of City-Systems (QoCS) on Quality of Life (QoL)

4. Long term change in QoCS vs short term fixes and

5. Priorities in QoL and QoCS

• Overall Mean Scores on 10 for each of the seven categories across which Quality of Life was surveyed, are

• Mobility-6.1

• Water- 6.2

• Cleanliness- 5.5

• Public amenities- 5.8

• Pollution control and greenery- 5.2

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresMobility System 6.86 5.17 6.17 6.14 5.39 5.73 4.40 6.50 6.31 6.21 6.87

Availability of adequate quantity of clean water 6.84 5.30 6.29 5.73 5.97 5.73 3.81 6.30 6.75 6.89 6.97

Cleanliness 6.71 4.86 5.36 4.83 5.38 5.30 2.96 5.60 5.71 6.44 6.76

Public Amenities 6.83 5.16 6.26 5.32 5.14 5.54 4.43 5.76 6.07 6.36 6.74

Pollution control and greenery 6.29 4.89 5.61 4.67 4.77 5.39 2.93 5.07 5.43 6.40 6.37

Crime and safety 5.57 5.15 5.80 3.70 5.36 5.14 2.14 5.53 5.38 6.66 6.28

Ease of process in Government offices 5.52 5.10 5.58 5.09 5.18 5.28 3.33 5.28 5.77 6.02 5.94

Mean Score 6.37 5.09 5.87 5.07 5.31 5.44 3.43 5.72 5.92 6.43 6.56

City-Wise RankingMobility System 2 10 6 7 9 8 11 3 4 5 1

Availability of adequate quantity of clean water 3 10 6 8 7 8 11 5 4 2 1

Cleanliness 2 9 7 10 6 8 11 5 4 3 1

Public Amenities 1 9 4 8 10 7 11 6 5 3 2

Pollution control and greenery 3 8 4 10 9 6 11 7 5 1 2

Crime and safety 4 8 3 10 7 9 11 5 6 1 2

Ease of process in Government offices 5 9 4 10 8 6 11 6 3 1 2

Overall Ranking 3 9 5 10 8 7 11 6 4 2 1

1. Voice of India’s Citizens on Quality of Life

37

• Crime and safety- 5.1 and

• Ease of Government processes- 5.4

• Only in 25 out of 77 indicator summary scores (i.e. 7 categories as above across 11 cities), scores are 6+ and none 7+, on a scale of 0 to 10

• Only 3 out of 231 data points (i.e. total of 21 indicators surveyed across 11 cities) score 7 +, all 3 between Ahmedabad and Surat

• Majority of the indicators (i.e. not just category level), have scores between 5 and 6

• Setting aside Kanpur that scores low all across (all less than 5, mostly 2-3), Bangalore scores < 5 on 10 on 13 out of the 21 indicators (mobility, cleanliness, public amenities, pollution), Delhi in 10 indicators (crime, pollution, cleanliness and quite surprisingly open spaces) and Hyderabad and Kolkata in 4 indicators each (pollution and public amenities).

• Only 2 out 70 indicators are at 7+, both in Ahmedabad, and none above 8, on a scale of 0 to 10, indicating the overall poor perception of City-Systems among citizens.

• Ahmedabad and Surat have all indicators at 6+ on 10.

• Bangalore has all < 6, with 8 out of 10 indicators at 5.3 or below

• 40% priority has been accorded by citizens on three specific aspects of City-Systems

• Effective Master Plans,

• Prevention and control of building violations and

• Knowledge and competence of civic officials.

Hyderabad stands out with 50% priority accorded to the above three City-System aspects.

2. Voice of India’s Citizens on Quality of City-Systems

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresUrban Planning and Design 7.20 5.78 6.43 6.57 6.51 5.93 5.16 5.33 6.65 6.03 6.87

Urban Capacities & Resources 6.33 5.25 6.10 5.68 5.80 5.62 4.27 5.22 5.79 5.88 6.90

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 6.02 5.26 5.75 5.30 5.72 5.46 4.06 5.55 5.78 5.84 6.86

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 6.17 5.12 5.80 5.24 5.70 5.59 3.57 4.65 5.69 5.55 6.91

Mean Score 6.43 5.35 6.02 5.70 5.93 5.65 4.26 5.19 5.98 5.82 6.88

City-Wise RankingUrban Planning and Design 1 9 6 4 5 8 11 10 3 7 2

Urban Capacities & Resources 2 9 3 7 5 8 11 10 6 4 1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 2 10 5 9 6 8 11 7 4 3 1

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 2 9 3 8 4 6 11 10 5 7 1

Overall Ranking 2 9 3 7 5 8 11 10 4 6 1

38

• Strong linkage perceived by citizens with 80-97% scoring 6+ on 10, for linkage between Quality of City-Systems and Quality of Life.

• Citizens across cities are willing to suffer near term inconveniences, if their City-Systems are fixed leading to sustainably high Quality of Life.

3. Voice of India’s Citizens on Impact of Quality of City-Systems on Quality of Life

4. Voice of India’s Citizens on long term change in QoCS vs short term fixes

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

% Respondents scoring the Impact (out of 10)6+ 83 93 94 81 73 98 79 78 94 97 87

7+ 59 76 89 61 40 88 34 52 80 76 59

8+ 28 26 84 36 9 69 2 23 41 53 27

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresSometimes, it may be better to have a long term solution, but may cause inconvenience for a short time

59.3 66.0 49.6 53.0 52.7 48.0 56.8 65.8 56.6 60.0 45.2

Sometimes it is desirable to address an issue immediately but this may not be sustainable in the long run

40.7 34.0 50.4 47.0 47.3 52.0 43.2 34.2 43.4 40.0 54.8

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

City-Wise RankingSometimes, it may be better to have a long term solution, but may cause inconvenience for a short time

4 1 9 7 8 10 5 2 6 3 11

39

• Transport and Water highest priorities

• Citizens’ demand robust Urban Planning, prevention of building violations and knowledgeable and competent civic officials.

5. Voice of India’s Citizens on QoL priorities

6. Voice of India’s Citizens on QoCS priorities

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur



Cleanliness 14.6 14.9 13.4 12.3 12.8 13.1 11.6 15.5 13.8 13.7 14.9



Crime and safety 13.7 12.3 12.6 12.0 12.7 15.2 13.3 12.5 11.6 15.3 14.3


Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresEffectiveness of Master Plan 15.5 16.6 14.0 16.6 20.3 13.3 14.3 13.4 17.2 10.7 13.0

Prevention of building violationss 12.8 13.9 13.5 14.5 20.1 12.1 12.0 12.0 14.8 10.5 11.8

Knowledge and Competence of civic officialss 10.4 11.6 11.1 10.9 8.6 10.2 12.2 11.2 10.0 9.6 11.0

Adequate number of civic officialss 9.2 9.4 10.0 9.2 8.5 9.8 10.3 10.4 8.6 10.1 10.8

Effectiveness of civic officials spending the money in a responsible and fair way 8.1 9.5 8.7 8.4 6.8 9.4 9.4 9.6 8.5 9.6 10.2

Ability and freedom to raise more funds to meet unmet demands 8.4 8.2 9.2 8.3 6.6 9.8 8.8 8.7 8.1 9.2 9.2

Level of sensitivity and commitment of your elected representativee 9.0 9.5 8.5 8.1 8.1 9.5 8.9 11.5 9.0 10.2 8.4

Competence of your elected representativee 9.2 9.3 8.5 8.1 8.1 8.9 8.8 10.7 8.3 10.2 9.0

Transparency, accuracy and usefulness of annual city budgett 8.9 6.5 8.4 8.3 6.6 8.4 7.7 7.5 8.0 9.7 8.2

Level of citizen’s participation in the annual budgeting process 8.5 5.5 8.0 7.6 6.2 8.4 7.6 5.0 7.5 10.2 8.5

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

40

Voice of India’s Citizens (VOICE) Survey: Methodology

1. Introduction

The VOICE ground surveys were carried out by market research firm TNS based on Janaagraha’s requirement. The VOICE survey questionnaire was jointly developed by Janaagraha and TNS.

2. Survey Design

Target respondent

• Male / Female

• Aged 18 years and above

• All Socio Economic Categories (SEC)

Research Technique

• Quantitative exercise, Face to Face, Pen and Paper Interviews with Structured questionnaire

• Interview duration : Around 20 minutes

• Interview duration : Around 20 minutes

Sampling Template

• Ward wise polling booth sampling was followed

• In order to ensure a proper representation of the city, 20% - 40% of the wards from each city were covered (based on the total wards in each city)

• Within each of the wards, two starting points were chosen.

• One starting points was exclusively for men and other for women – to ensure equal split of gender.

3. Sample Size

Total number of samples covered under VOICE survey is four thousand two hundred and thirty six, comprising five hundred each in Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, four hundred each in Chennai, Bangalore and Hyderabad and three hundred each in the remaining. A total of four hundred and thirty wards were covered during the survey, with a minimum of twenty per city. Samples were weighted using IRS data in order to align the sample to universe proportions. Variables used for weighting are Socio Economic Categories (using Occupation and Education), Age and Gender.

Please write to us at [email protected] for further information on methodology of VOICE Survey.

41

This page is intentionally left blank

42

DATA BOOK

43

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

Urban Planning and Design (UPD) 2.5 2.9 2.2 3.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 4.2 2.6 0.7 2.5 8.8 8.8

Urban Capacities and Resources (UCR) 2.5 0.9 2.2 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 9.9 8.1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation (ELPR) 3.2 1.9 4.1 2.2 2.6 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 9.4 9.3

Transparency, Accountability and Participation (TAP) 1.5 3.0 2.9 1.2 4.4 1.2 3.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.4 8.9 8.1

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

Urban Planning and Design (UPD) 8 3 10 2 3 7 5 1 6 11 8 1 1

Urban Capacities and Resources (UCR) 4 11 7 1 8 6 10 9 2 3 5 1 2

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation (ELPR) 7 11 3 10 9 1 4 2 6 5 8 1 2

Transparency, Accountability and Participation (TAP) 8 5 6 10 1 11 4 7 2 3 9 1 2

Curtain Raiser of ScoresCity wise ASICS Scores on Scale of 0-10

City wise ASICS Ranking

Notes:

Delhi has been reckoned prior to trifurcation of Municipal Corporation of Delhi into three Municipal Corporations. New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) is not considered for this purpose. In the case of London, Greater London Authority (GLA) has been considered.

Legend:

Ahd-Ahmedabad, Blr-Bengaluru, Che-Chennai, Del-Delhi, Hyd-Hyderabad, Jpr-Jaipur, Kpr-Kanpur, Kol-Kolkata, Mum-Mumbai, Pun-Pune, Sur-Surat, NYC-New York City, Lon-London.

44

Sl N

o.

Urban Planning & Design

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

NYC

Lon

Urban Planning and Urban Design

1 Metropolitan Area 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.1 1.1

2 Spatial Plans 2.0 2.0 1.7 3.0 2.3 2.0 2.3 2.0 2.0 0.3 2.0 5.0 5.6

3 Metropolitan Planning Committee - - - - - - - 1.7 - - - - -

4 Institutional Structures and Powers 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 - 0.1 1.0 0.4

5 Guaranteed Land Title - - - - - - - - - - - 1.7 1.7

Score out of 10 2.5 2.9 2.2 3.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 4.2 2.6 0.7 2.5 8.8 8.8

Urban Capacities & Resources

1 Finance 2.0 0.8 1.6 2.1 1.9 2.2 1.4 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 4.6 3.8

2 Human Resources 0.5 0.1 0.5 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.5 2.2 2.0

3 Institutional Structures and Powers - - - - - - - - - - - 3.1 2.3

Score out of 10 2.5 0.9 2.2 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 9.9 8.1


1 State Election Commission 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.1 2.1 2.1 1.4 1.7 1.7

2 Mayor - - 2.1 - 0.7 2.1 2.1 0.7 - - - 4.2 4.2

3 Council 1.7 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.1 1.7 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 3.6 3.5

Score out of 10 3.2 1.9 4.1 2.2 2.6 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 9.4 9.3


1 Transparency 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.1 0.9 0.1 0.8 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.1 1.7 1.7

2 Accountability 1.4 1.7 1.7 1.1 1.7 1.1 1.1 1.3 2.0 1.9 1.2 6.3 5.5

3 Citizen Participation - 0.4 0.4 - 1.9 - 1.1 1.1 0.4 0.4 - 0.9 0.9

Score out of 10 1.5 3.0 2.9 1.2 4.4 1.2 3.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.4 8.9 8.1

Category Scores

Notes:

1. Note: Scores have been rounded to the nearest decimal

45

Sl N

o.

Category Classification Total No. of Qns Policy and Institution Process and

Implementation

Urban Planning and Urban Design

1 Metropolitan Area 2 2 -

2 Spatial Plans 8 3 5

3 Metropolitan Planning Committee 6 5 1

4 Institutional Structures and Powers 3 2 1

5 Guaranteed Land Title 2 1 1

Sub total 21 13 8

Urban Capacities & Resources

1 Finance 10 5 5

2 Human Resources 2 1 1

3 Institutional Structures and Powers 4 1 3

Sub-total 16 7 9


1 State Election Commission 3 3 -

2 Mayor 3 3 -

3 Council 4 3 1

Sub-total 10 9 1


1 Transparency 4 1 3

2 Accountability 15 9 6

3 Citizen Participation 5 1 4

Sub-total 24 11 13

Classification of ASICS Questions

46

Q N

o.

Question Scoring Method

Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

Urban Planning and Urban DesignI Metropolitan Area1 Is the demarcation of the Metropolitan Area (MA) legally notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Is the MA co-terminus with the existing district boundary or boundaries? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 - 10 - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

II Spatial Plans

3 Do the following Spatial Plans exist, together constituting an Integrated Regional Spatial Plan? Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

iii Ward Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10

4 What is the duration of Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan? 20-25 years = 1,Other = 0 10 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan? 20-25 years = 1, Other = 0 10 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 10 10 10

iii Ward Development Plan? 5 years = 1, Other= 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 0 10

5 What is the time lag in notification between Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan and Municipal Spatial Development Plan? <=2 Years = 1, > 2 Years = 0 10 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan and Ward Development Plan? <=2 Years = 1, > 2 Years = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - 10 10 10

6 Compliance of lower level plans with higher level plans: Process and Implementation

i Is the Municipal Spatial Development Plan compliant with the Metropolitan Spatial Devel-opment Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Is the Ward Development Plan compliant with the Municipal Spatial Development Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10

7Does the State Town and Country Planning (T and CP) Act or the Urban Development Authority (DA) Act mandate citizen participation in the preparation of Metropolitan and Municipal Spatial Development Plans?

YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

8 Does the State Public Disclosure Law (PDL) mandate the disclosure of the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spatial Development Plan in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

9 Is there a legal provision in the State T and CP Act or the DA Act that mandates disclosure of information on plan violations in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 0

10

Is there a long-term financial projection for the constituent Urban Local Bodies (ULB) of the MA which is drawn-up based on the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spatial Development Plan and allied infrastructure requirements, and is the basis for the ULB's medium-term fiscal plan and annual budgeting process?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10


11 Has a Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) been created as required by Article 243 ZE of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 (74th CAA)? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - 20 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

12 Is the composition of the MPC in accordance with the provisions of Article 243 ZE? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

13 Has the MPC forwarded its plans to the State Government/Planning Board as required under 243 ZE? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

14 Has the Regional Development Authority/ Development Authority been made the technical and administrative arm of the MPC? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

15Have sectoral committees been set up in the MPC tasked with drawing up of sectoral plans derived from the Metropolitan Plan, with an executive committee consolidating and inte-grating such sectoral plans?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

16Are Ward Committees, the ULB and the MPC involved in plan enforcement, with the ULB and the MPC acting as appellate authorities for appeals against decisions of the Ward Commit-tees and ULBs respectively?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

IV Institutional Structures and Powers17 Have the following specialised bodies/agencies been created for the MA? 10 4 6 6 6 6 6 4 6 8 - 4 Policy and Institution 10 8 8

i Spatial Data Centre YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0

ii Transit Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - - - 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2

iii Environment Cell YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0.2

iv Heritage Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0 0.2

The ASICS 2013 Scorecard

47

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

Urban Planning and Urban DesignI Metropolitan Area1 Is the demarcation of the Metropolitan Area (MA) legally notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Is the MA co-terminus with the existing district boundary or boundaries? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 - 10 - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

II Spatial Plans

3 Do the following Spatial Plans exist, together constituting an Integrated Regional Spatial Plan? Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10

iii Ward Development Plan YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10

4 What is the duration of Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan? 20-25 years = 1,Other = 0 10 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan? 20-25 years = 1, Other = 0 10 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 10 10 10

iii Ward Development Plan? 5 years = 1, Other= 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 0 10

5 What is the time lag in notification between Process and Implementation

i Metropolitan Spatial Development Plan and Municipal Spatial Development Plan? <=2 Years = 1, > 2 Years = 0 10 10 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - 10 NA NA

ii Municipal Spatial Development Plan and Ward Development Plan? <=2 Years = 1, > 2 Years = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - 10 10 10

6 Compliance of lower level plans with higher level plans: Process and Implementation

i Is the Municipal Spatial Development Plan compliant with the Metropolitan Spatial Devel-opment Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 0 10 NA NA

ii Is the Ward Development Plan compliant with the Municipal Spatial Development Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10

7Does the State Town and Country Planning (T and CP) Act or the Urban Development Authority (DA) Act mandate citizen participation in the preparation of Metropolitan and Municipal Spatial Development Plans?


8 Does the State Public Disclosure Law (PDL) mandate the disclosure of the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spatial Development Plan in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

9 Is there a legal provision in the State T and CP Act or the DA Act that mandates disclosure of information on plan violations in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 0

10

Is there a long-term financial projection for the constituent Urban Local Bodies (ULB) of the MA which is drawn-up based on the Metropolitan and/or Municipal Spatial Development Plan and allied infrastructure requirements, and is the basis for the ULB's medium-term fiscal plan and annual budgeting process?



11 Has a Metropolitan Planning Committee (MPC) been created as required by Article 243 ZE of the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 (74th CAA)? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - 20 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

12 Is the composition of the MPC in accordance with the provisions of Article 243 ZE? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

13 Has the MPC forwarded its plans to the State Government/Planning Board as required under 243 ZE? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

14 Has the Regional Development Authority/ Development Authority been made the technical and administrative arm of the MPC? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

15Have sectoral committees been set up in the MPC tasked with drawing up of sectoral plans derived from the Metropolitan Plan, with an executive committee consolidating and inte-grating such sectoral plans?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

16Are Ward Committees, the ULB and the MPC involved in plan enforcement, with the ULB and the MPC acting as appellate authorities for appeals against decisions of the Ward Commit-tees and ULBs respectively?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

IV Institutional Structures and Powers17 Have the following specialised bodies/agencies been created for the MA? 10 4 6 6 6 6 6 4 6 8 - 4 Policy and Institution 10 8 8

i Spatial Data Centre YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0

ii Transit Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - - - 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2

iii Environment Cell YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 0.2

iv Heritage Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0 0.2

48

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

v Economic and Statistical Data Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.2

18 Does the MA have a single base map that is used by all the civic service providers in the MA? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 0

19 Does the ULB have the authority to permit land-use change in consonance with the Munici-pal Spatial Development Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

V Guaranteed Land Title 20 Is there a law that provides for Guaranteed Land Titling in the MA/ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

21 Has a Land Titling Authority been created by such law? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

Urban Capacities and ResourcesI Finance1 Is the ULB empowered to set and collect the following taxes? 10 5 5 7.5 5 5 7.5 2.5 5 2.5 2.5 5 Policy and Institution 10 10 2.5

i Property tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

ii Entertainment tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.25 0

iii Profession tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 - 0.25 - - 0.25 - - - - 0.25 0.25 0

iv Advertisement tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - - - 0.25 0

2 "What is the Per Capita Capital Expenditure of the ULB? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)"

Per Capita Capital Expenditure Per Capital Expenditure of NY 10 1.1 1.6 0.4 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.9 1.6 0.8 Process and Implementation 10 10 7.1

3 Is the ULB authorised to raise borrowings without State Government/ Central Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

4 Is the ULB authorised to make investments or otherwise apply surplus funds without spe-cific State Government/ Central Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

5

Does the ULB receive specific relief in lieu of civic service delivery commitments arising out of transport/ other major infrastructure created in its area of jurisdiction by State Govern-ment/Central Government or other parastatal agencies (e.g. metro rail, business districts/parks etc.)?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - 10 - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

6 Does the Annual Budget of the ULB have to be approved by the State Government? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10 - 10 10 10 - - 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

7 Have four State Finance Commissions (SFC) been constituted by the State Government? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) Number of SFCs constituted /4 (ideal) 10 7.5 7.5 10 10 7.5 10 10 7.5 10 10 7.5 Process and Implementation NA NA

8 Have the SFCs been constituted with a time interval of five years each? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

9Has the Action Taken Report of the last SFC been placed before the state legislature before the expiry of six months from the date of submission of the report, as recommended by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (SARC)?


10 Is the ULB required by law to have a Long-Term and/or Medium-Term Fiscal Plan ? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

II Human Resources11 Does the ULB have the following powers with respect to its employees? 10 6 - 6 6 - - 6 6 6 6 6 Policy and Institution 10 8 8

i Appointment YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

ii Promotion YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.2

iii Disciplinary Action YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

iv Termination YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

v Incentivisation YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0

12 Does the ULB have adequate staff commensurate with the population within its jurisdic-tion? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of employees/100,000 population Corresponding benchmark of NY 20 2.6 1.4 3.34 7.52 2.37 2.38 1.83 4.67 5.47 3.78 2.37 Process and Implementation 20 20 18.3


13Is there an institutional mechanism that empowers the ULB to control, manage, supervise, intervene in or veto crucial decisions of other parastatal/civic agencies in respect of their operations in its jurisdiction in so far as they impact citizens and Quality of Life?


14Is the ULB required to put in place a Performance Management Information System/alter-nate decision-support system that institutionalises performance based reviews of/decisions in respect of finances and operations?


15 Has the ULB put in place a Digital Governance Roadmap? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 0

16 Does the ULB have an incident or emergency management system? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10


49

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

v Economic and Statistical Data Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.2

18 Does the MA have a single base map that is used by all the civic service providers in the MA? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 0

19 Does the ULB have the authority to permit land-use change in consonance with the Munici-pal Spatial Development Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution NA NA

V Guaranteed Land Title 20 Is there a law that provides for Guaranteed Land Titling in the MA/ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

21 Has a Land Titling Authority been created by such law? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

Urban Capacities and ResourcesI Finance1 Is the ULB empowered to set and collect the following taxes? 10 5 5 7.5 5 5 7.5 2.5 5 2.5 2.5 5 Policy and Institution 10 10 2.5

i Property tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

ii Entertainment tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.25 0

iii Profession tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 - 0.25 - - 0.25 - - - - 0.25 0.25 0

iv Advertisement tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - - - 0.25 0

2 "What is the Per Capita Capital Expenditure of the ULB? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)"

Per Capita Capital Expenditure Per Capital Expenditure of NY 10 1.1 1.6 0.4 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.9 1.6 0.8 Process and Implementation 10 10 7.1

3 Is the ULB authorised to raise borrowings without State Government/ Central Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

4 Is the ULB authorised to make investments or otherwise apply surplus funds without spe-cific State Government/ Central Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

5

Does the ULB receive specific relief in lieu of civic service delivery commitments arising out of transport/ other major infrastructure created in its area of jurisdiction by State Govern-ment/Central Government or other parastatal agencies (e.g. metro rail, business districts/parks etc.)?


6 Does the Annual Budget of the ULB have to be approved by the State Government? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10 - 10 10 10 - - 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

7 Have four State Finance Commissions (SFC) been constituted by the State Government? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) Number of SFCs constituted /4 (ideal) 10 7.5 7.5 10 10 7.5 10 10 7.5 10 10 7.5 Process and Implementation NA NA

8 Have the SFCs been constituted with a time interval of five years each? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

9Has the Action Taken Report of the last SFC been placed before the state legislature before the expiry of six months from the date of submission of the report, as recommended by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission (SARC)?


10 Is the ULB required by law to have a Long-Term and/or Medium-Term Fiscal Plan ? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

II Human Resources11 Does the ULB have the following powers with respect to its employees? 10 6 - 6 6 - - 6 6 6 6 6 Policy and Institution 10 8 8

i Appointment YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

ii Promotion YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.2 0.2

iii Disciplinary Action YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

iv Termination YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2 - 0.2 0.2 - - 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

v Incentivisation YES = 0.2 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0

12 Does the ULB have adequate staff commensurate with the population within its jurisdic-tion? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of employees/100,000 population Corresponding benchmark of NY 20 2.6 1.4 3.34 7.52 2.37 2.38 1.83 4.67 5.47 3.78 2.37 Process and Implementation 20 20 18.3


13Is there an institutional mechanism that empowers the ULB to control, manage, supervise, intervene in or veto crucial decisions of other parastatal/civic agencies in respect of their operations in its jurisdiction in so far as they impact citizens and Quality of Life?


14Is the ULB required to put in place a Performance Management Information System/alter-nate decision-support system that institutionalises performance based reviews of/decisions in respect of finances and operations?


15 Has the ULB put in place a Digital Governance Roadmap? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 0

16 Does the ULB have an incident or emergency management system? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10


50

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

1 Has the State Election Commission (SEC) been constituted, with powers to perform func-tions specified under Article 243ZA of the 74th CAA? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Is the SEC empowered to decide in matters of electoral delimitation of the ULB/Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

3 Is the SEC in charge of reservation and rotation of seats in the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - - - - - 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution NA NA

II Mayor4 Does the Mayor of the ULB have a five year term? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

5 Is the Mayor directly elected? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - 20 - - 20 20 - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

6 Does the Mayor or the Council have the authority to recruit and appoint the Municipal Com-missioner/Chief Executive of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

III Council

7

Is the ULB responsible for providing ten specific and critical functions and services? (out of a total of twenty functions and services arrived at by taking together eighteen functions and services listed under Schedule XII of the 74th CAA and recommendations of the SARC, and eliminating overlapping items)?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of 10 identified critical functions performed by the ULB

10 critical functions20 10 2 2 6 6 8 2 4 8 8 10 Policy and Institution 20 20 18

8 Is there a reservation policy for a) the Council and b) leadership positions in the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution NA NA

9Is there a register of interests/ equivalent disclosure that is publicly available and widely disseminated capturing related party interests, relationships and transactions in respect of Councillors?

YES =1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

10 What was the voting percentage in the last Council elections? Based on Actual Voting % 10 4.4 4.5 4.8 4.3 4.8 5.2 4.1 6.2 4.6 5.3 4.2 Process and Implementation 10 3.0 3.9

Transparency, Accountability and ParticipationI Transparency1 Has the State Government enacted the PDL? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Have Rules implementing the PDL been notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 10 - Process and Implementation NA NA

3 Does the ULB have a comprehensive website? Score as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 2.1 4.2 3.33 2.874 3.76 2.16 1.511 3.48 3.734 4.268 3.136 Process and Implementation 10 8.2 8.1

4Does the ULB have an Open Data policy or framework whereby all financial and operational records of the ULB are made easily accessible to the public through suo motu disclosures, including in electronic form on their webistes.


II Accountability

5 Does the State Municipal law/other law provide for a Local Government Ombudsman in the State? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

6 Is the Ombudsman authorized to: 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

i Investigate corruption YES = 0.5 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5

ii Resolve inter-agency disputes YES = 0.5 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5

7 Does the ULB's External Auditor report to the Council and/or the State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - - 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

8 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to have its Annual Accounts audited before the expiry of six months from the end of a financial year? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

9 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to respond to observations raised by its Auditors within a specified time period? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 10

10 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to present responses to Auditors' observa-tions which are then placed before the Council/State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - 10 - - 10 - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 10

11 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to carry out an Internal Audit within a prede-termined frequency, at least annual? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

12 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to hold public consultations/facilitate other form of citizen participation in the Annual Budget preparation process? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

13 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to comply with Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management targets/thresholds/other equivalent provisions? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

14 Citizens' Charter 10 2.5 - - - 10 - 10 10 - 10 2.5 Process and Implementation 10 7.5 2.5

i Does the ULB have a Citizens' Charter in place for the services provided by it? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

ii Does the Citizens' Charter comprehensively describe the target levels of service? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0.25 0

iii Does the Citizens' Charter provide timelines for delivery of services? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0 0

iv Does the Citizens' Charter provide protocols for obtaining relief, where service levels are not met? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0.25 0

15 Online Complaint Management System (OCMS) 10 10 10 10 5 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 Process and Implementation 10 10 10

i Has the ULB put in place an OCMS? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

51

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

1 Has the State Election Commission (SEC) been constituted, with powers to perform func-tions specified under Article 243ZA of the 74th CAA? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Is the SEC empowered to decide in matters of electoral delimitation of the ULB/Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

3 Is the SEC in charge of reservation and rotation of seats in the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - - - - - 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution NA NA

II Mayor4 Does the Mayor of the ULB have a five year term? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

5 Is the Mayor directly elected? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - 20 - - 20 20 - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

6 Does the Mayor or the Council have the authority to recruit and appoint the Municipal Com-missioner/Chief Executive of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

III Council

7

Is the ULB responsible for providing ten specific and critical functions and services? (out of a total of twenty functions and services arrived at by taking together eighteen functions and services listed under Schedule XII of the 74th CAA and recommendations of the SARC, and eliminating overlapping items)?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of 10 identified critical functions performed by the ULB

10 critical functions20 10 2 2 6 6 8 2 4 8 8 10 Policy and Institution 20 20 18

8 Is there a reservation policy for a) the Council and b) leadership positions in the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution NA NA


YES =1 NO = 0 20 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 20 20 20

10 What was the voting percentage in the last Council elections? Based on Actual Voting % 10 4.4 4.5 4.8 4.3 4.8 5.2 4.1 6.2 4.6 5.3 4.2 Process and Implementation 10 3.0 3.9

Transparency, Accountability and ParticipationI Transparency1 Has the State Government enacted the PDL? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

2 Have Rules implementing the PDL been notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 10 - Process and Implementation NA NA

3 Does the ULB have a comprehensive website? Score as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 2.1 4.2 3.33 2.874 3.76 2.16 1.511 3.48 3.734 4.268 3.136 Process and Implementation 10 8.2 8.1

4Does the ULB have an Open Data policy or framework whereby all financial and operational records of the ULB are made easily accessible to the public through suo motu disclosures, including in electronic form on their webistes.


II Accountability

5 Does the State Municipal law/other law provide for a Local Government Ombudsman in the State? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

6 Is the Ombudsman authorized to: 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 10

i Investigate corruption YES = 0.5 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5

ii Resolve inter-agency disputes YES = 0.5 NO = 0 - - - - - - - - - - - 0.5 0.5

7 Does the ULB's External Auditor report to the Council and/or the State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 - - 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

8 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to have its Annual Accounts audited before the expiry of six months from the end of a financial year? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

9 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to respond to observations raised by its Auditors within a specified time period? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 10

10 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to present responses to Auditors' observa-tions which are then placed before the Council/State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - 10 - - 10 - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 0 10

11 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to carry out an Internal Audit within a prede-termined frequency, at least annual? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10 - - 10 10 - 10 10 10 10 10 Policy and Institution 10 10 10

12 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to hold public consultations/facilitate other form of citizen participation in the Annual Budget preparation process? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

13 Is the ULB required by its governing legislation to comply with Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management targets/thresholds/other equivalent provisions? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - - - - - - - - Policy and Institution 10 10 0

14 Citizens' Charter 10 2.5 - - - 10 - 10 10 - 10 2.5 Process and Implementation 10 7.5 2.5

i Does the ULB have a Citizens' Charter in place for the services provided by it? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25 - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

ii Does the Citizens' Charter comprehensively describe the target levels of service? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0.25 0

iii Does the Citizens' Charter provide timelines for delivery of services? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0 0

iv Does the Citizens' Charter provide protocols for obtaining relief, where service levels are not met? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 - - - - 0.25 - 0.25 0.25 - 0.25 - 0.25 0

15 Online Complaint Management System (OCMS) 10 10 10 10 5 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 Process and Implementation 10 10 10

i Has the ULB put in place an OCMS? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

52

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

ii Can a complaint regarding any service provided by the ULB be processed by this system? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 - 0.5 - 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

16 Ease of Doing Business (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) 10 5.7 6.3 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.7 NA 4.0 4.0 NA NA Process and Implementation 10 10 7.5

i What is the time taken in days to obtain a construction permit in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.4 NA 0.3 0.3 NA NA 2.5 0.7

ii What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to obtain a construction permit in the city?

No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.3 2.0 NA 1.4 1.0 NA NA 2.5 4.2

iii What is the time taken in days to register a property in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.3 NA 0.3 0.7 NA NA 2.5 1.0

iv What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to register a property in the city? No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 2.0 2.0 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 NA 2.0 2.0 NA NA 2.5 1.7

17Does the ULB maintain a comprehensive database of approvals, certificates and permits granted/issued and share the same with the Metropolitan Economic and Statistical Data Authority?


18 Does the ULB have an e-procurement system (including vendor registration)? YES = 1 NO = 0 as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 - 10 - - - - - - 10 10 - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

19 Are the Audited Annual Financial Statements of the ULB available in the public domain in-cluding the website of the ULB?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

2011-12 = 1 2010-11 = 0.5

2009-10 = 0.25 Prior to 2009-10 = 0

20 - - - - - - - - 10 - - Process and Implementation 20 20 20

III Citizen Participation20 Has the State Government enacted the Community Participation Law (CPL)? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution NA NA

21 Have Rules implementing the CPL been notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - 10 - 10 10 - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

22 Have Ward Committees been constituted for all wards of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - 10 - 10 10 - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

23 Have Area Sabhas been constituted in all wards of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - 20 - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

24Does the ULB harness the spirit of volunteerism among its citizens and provide opportuni-ties for citizens to participate in the process of improving the Quality of Life in their cities, thereby also fostering a spirit of community and citizenship?


Urban Planning and Design 2.5 2.9 2.2 3.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 4.2 2.6 0.7 2.5 8.8 8.8

Urban Capacities and Resources 2.5 0.9 2.2 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 9.9 8.1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 3.2 1.9 4.1 2.2 2.6 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 9.4 9.3

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 1.5 3.0 2.9 1.2 4.4 1.2 3.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.4 8.9 8.1

53

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Ahd

- A

hmed

abad

Blr -

Ban

galo

re

Che

- Che

nnai

Del

- N

ew D

elhi

Hyd

- H

yder

abad

Jpr -

Jaip

ur

Kpr -

Kan

pur

Kol -

Kol

kata

Mum

- M

umba

i

Pun

- Pun

e

Sur -

Sur

at Category

Wei

ghta

ge

NYC

- N

ew Y

ork

Lon

- Lon

don

ii Can a complaint regarding any service provided by the ULB be processed by this system? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 - 0.5 - 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

16 Ease of Doing Business (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) 10 5.7 6.3 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.7 NA 4.0 4.0 NA NA Process and Implementation 10 10 7.5

i What is the time taken in days to obtain a construction permit in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.4 NA 0.3 0.3 NA NA 2.5 0.7

ii What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to obtain a construction permit in the city?

No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2.3 2.0 NA 1.4 1.0 NA NA 2.5 4.2

iii What is the time taken in days to register a property in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.3 NA 0.3 0.7 NA NA 2.5 1.0

iv What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to register a property in the city? No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 2.0 2.0 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.0 NA 2.0 2.0 NA NA 2.5 1.7

17Does the ULB maintain a comprehensive database of approvals, certificates and permits granted/issued and share the same with the Metropolitan Economic and Statistical Data Authority?


18 Does the ULB have an e-procurement system (including vendor registration)? YES = 1 NO = 0 as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 - 10 - - - - - - 10 10 - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

19 Are the Audited Annual Financial Statements of the ULB available in the public domain in-cluding the website of the ULB?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

2011-12 = 1 2010-11 = 0.5

2009-10 = 0.25 Prior to 2009-10 = 0

20 - - - - - - - - 10 - - Process and Implementation 20 20 20

III Citizen Participation20 Has the State Government enacted the Community Participation Law (CPL)? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - 10 10 - 10 - 10 10 10 10 - Policy and Institution NA NA

21 Have Rules implementing the CPL been notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - 10 - 10 10 - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

22 Have Ward Committees been constituted for all wards of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 - - - - 10 - 10 10 - - - Process and Implementation 10 10 10

23 Have Area Sabhas been constituted in all wards of the ULB? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 - - - - 20 - - - - - - Process and Implementation NA NA

24Does the ULB harness the spirit of volunteerism among its citizens and provide opportuni-ties for citizens to participate in the process of improving the Quality of Life in their cities, thereby also fostering a spirit of community and citizenship?


Urban Planning and Design 2.5 2.9 2.2 3.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 4.2 2.6 0.7 2.5 8.8 8.8

Urban Capacities and Resources 2.5 0.9 2.2 2.9 2.1 2.4 1.8 2.0 2.7 2.6 2.4 9.9 8.1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 3.2 1.9 4.1 2.2 2.6 4.5 4.0 4.3 3.8 3.8 3.2 9.4 9.3

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 1.5 3.0 2.9 1.2 4.4 1.2 3.1 2.9 3.3 3.2 1.4 8.9 8.1

54

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

Urban Planning and Urban DesignI Planning Area1 Is the New York City (NYC) planning area formed by complete administrative regions? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Is the demarcation of the planning area legally notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Spatial Plans

3 Do the following Spatial Plans exist, together constituting an Integrated Regional Spatial Plan?

i Spatial Development Plan for the NYC area (NYC Plan) YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

ii Borough Plans for each borough YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

4 What is the duration of

i Spatial Development Plan for the NYC area 20-25 years = 1 Other = 0 10 10

ii Borough Plans <= 5 years = 1; > 5 years = 0 10 -

5 What is the time-lag in notification between NYC Plan and Borough plans? <=2 Years = 1; > 2 Years = 0 10 10

6 Are Borough Plans compliant with the NYC Plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

7 Is there legal provision for citizen participation in the plan preparation process for NYC area? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

8 Is the NYC Plan disclosed in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

9 Are violations of NYC Plan and Borough Plans disclosed in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

10Is there a long term financial projection drawn up based on the NYC Plan and allied infra-structure requirements, which forms the basis for financial planning by the NYC govern-ment?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Is the NYC Plan required to be approved by the State Government? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10

III Institutional Structures & Powers12 Have the following bodies been created for the City? 10 8

i Spatial Data Centre YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

ii Transit Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iii Environment Cell YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iv Heritage Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 -

v Economic and Statistical Data Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

13 Does NYC have a single base map that is used by all the civic service providers in the city? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

IV Guaranteed Land Title14 Is there a legislative and policy framework that provides for Guaranteed Land Titling? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

15 Has a Land Titling Authority been created by such law? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Urban Capacities and ResourcesI Finance1 Does the NYC government have the power to set and collect 10 10

i Property tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

ii Entertainment tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

iii Professional tax/Unincorporated business tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

iv Advertisement tax/Income tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

2 What is the Per Capita Capital Expenditure of NYC government?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) NYC is the benchmark 10 10

3 Is the NYC government authorised to raise borrowings without State Government/Federal Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

4 Is the NYC government authorised to make investments without State Government/Federal Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

5 Does the Annual Budget of the NYC government have to be approved by the State Govern-ment? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10

ASICS 2013 Benchmark - NYC

55

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

6 Is the NYC government required to have a Long-term and/or Medium-term fiscal plan? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Human Resources7 Does the NYC council have the following powers with respect to all its employees? 10 8

i Appointment YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

ii Promotion YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iii Disciplinary Action YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iv Termination YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

v Incentivisation YES = 0.2 NO = 0 -

8 Does the NYC government have adequate staff commensurate with the population within its jurisdiction? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) NYC is the benchmark 20 20

III Institutional Structures

9

Is there an institutional mechanism that empowers the NYC government to control, man-age, supervise, intervene in or veto crucial decisions of other parastatal/civic agencies in respect of their operations in its jurisdiction in so far as they impact citizens and Quality of Life?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

10Has the NYC government put in place a Performance Management Information System/alternate decision-support system that institutionalises performance based reviews of/deci-sions in respect of finances and operations?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Has the NYC government put in place a digital governance roadmap? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

12 Does the NYC government have an incident management system to deal with emergencies? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Empowered & Legitimate Political RepresentationI Elections

1 Is there an independent/autonomous organisation that is responsible for delimitation of electoral units in the city? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Is there an independent body mandated to conduct City Council elections? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Mayor3 Is the Mayor of the City directly elected? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

4 Does the Mayor have a 4 year term? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

5 Does the Mayor and/or the council have the authority to appoint the senior management of the NYC government? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

III Council

6

Is the NYC government responsible for providing ten specific and critical functions and ser-vices? (out of a total of twenty functions and services arrived at by taking together eighteen functions and services listed under Schedule XII of the 74th CAA and recommendations of the SARC, and eliminating overlapping items)? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of identified major functions performed by the City Government

10 major functions20 20


YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

8 What was the voting percentage in the last Council elections? Actual Voting % 10 3

Transparency, Accountability & ParticipationI Transparency

1 Is there a law in force that mandates extensive public disclosure of information by the City Government? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Does the NYC government have a comprehensive website? Score as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 8.2

3Does the NYC government have an Open Data policy or framework whereby all its financial and operational records are made easily accessible to the public through suo motu disclo-sures, including in electronic form on their websites.

YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

II Accountability4 Is there a law that provides for a Local Government Level ombudsman? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

56

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

5 Is the ombudsman authorized to: 10 10

i Investigate corruption YES = 0.5 NO= 0 0.5

ii Resolve inter-agency disputes YES = 0.5 NO= 0 0.5

6 Does the NYC government's External Auditor report to the City Council and/or the State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

7 Is the NYC government required by its governing legislation to get its annual accounts audited before expiry of six months from the end of a financial year? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

8 Is the NYC government required to respond to observations raised by Auditors within a specified time period? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

9 Is the Mayor required to present responses to Auditors' observations in the Council/ State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

10 Is the NYC government required by its governing legislation to carry out an Internal Audit within a predetermined frequency, at least annual? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Is the NYC government required to hold public consultations/facilitate other form of citizen participation in the Annual Budget preparation process? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

12 Is the NYC government required by law to comply with Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management targets/thresholds/other equivalent provisions? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

13 Citizens' Charter 10 7.5

i Does the NYC government have a Citizens' Charter in place for the services provided by it? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

ii Does the Citizens' Charter comprehensively describe the target levels of service? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

iii Does the Citizens' Charter provide timelines for delivery of services? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

iv Does the Citizens' Charter provide protocols for obtaining relief, where service levels are not met? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

14 Online Complaint Management System (OCMS) 10 10

i Has the NYC government put in place an OCMS? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

ii Can a complaint regarding any service provided by the City government be processed by this system? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

15 Ease of Doing Business(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) 10 10

i What is the time taken in days to obtain a construction permit in the city? New York City is the benchmark 2.5

ii What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to obtain a construction permit in the city? New York City is the benchmark 2.5

iii What is the time taken in days to register a property in the city? New York City is the benchmark 2.5

iv What is the number of procedures to be dealt with to register a property in the city? New York City is the benchmark 2.5

16 Does the NYC government maintain a comprehensive database of approvals, certificates and permits granted/issued? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

17 Does the NYC government have an e-procurement system? YES = 1 NO = 0 as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 10

18Are the Audited Annual Financial Statements of the NYC government available in the public domain including on its website ?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

2011-12 = 1 2010-11 = 0.5

2009-10 = 0.25 Prior Years = 0

20 20

III Citizen Participation

19 Are there structured institutionalised platforms for citizen participation in civic administra-tion, in a tiered manner below the level of the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

20Does the NYC government harness the spirit of volunteerism among its citizens and provide opportunities for citizens to participate in the process of improving the Quality of Life in their cities, thereby also fostering a spirit of community and citizenship?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Urban Planning & Design 8.8

Urban Capacities & Resources 9.9

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 9.4

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 8.9

57

ASICS 2013 Benchmark - LondonQ

No.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

Urban Planning & DesignI Planning Area

1 Is the Greater London Authority (GLA) planning area formed by complete administrative areas? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Is the demarcation of the planning area legally notified? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Spatial Plans

3 Do the following Spatial Plans exist (together constituting an Integrated Regional Spatial Plan)

i. A Spatial development plan for the GLA area YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

ii. A Borough Plan for each borough YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

4 What is the duration of the:

i. Spatial development plan for the GLA area 20-25 years = 1 Other = 0 10 10

ii. Borough Plans <= 5 years = 1; > 5 years = 0 10 10

5 What is the time-lag in notification between spatial development plan for GLA area and Borough Plans? <=2 Years = 1; > 2 Years = 0 10 10

6 Are the Borough plans compliant with the spatial development plan for GLA area? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

7 Is there a legal provision for citizen participation in the spatial development plan prepara-tion process for GLA area? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

8 Is the spatial development plan disclosed in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

9 Are violations of spatial development plan for GLA area and Borough Plans disclosed in the public domain? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 0

10Is there a long term financial projection drawn up based on the spatial development plan for the GLA area and allied infrastructure requirements, which forms the basis for financial planning by the GLA?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Is the Spatial development plan for the GLA area required to be approved by the Union Government? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10

III Institutional Structures & Powers12 Have the following bodies been created for the GLA? 10 8

i Spatial Data Centre YES = 0.2 NO = 0 -

ii Transit Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iii Environment Cell YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iv Heritage Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

v Economic and Statistical Data Authority YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

13 Does GLA have a single base map that is used by all the civic service providers in the city? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

IV Guaranteed Land Title14 Is there a legislative and policy framework that provides for Guaranteed Land Titling? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

15 Has a Land Titling Authority been created by such law? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Urban Capacities & ResourcesI Finance1 Do the GLA/ Boroughs have the power to Set & Collect: 10 2.5

i Property tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

ii Entertainment Tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

iii Professional tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

iv Advertisement tax YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

2 What is the Per Capita Capital Expenditure of GLA?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

Per Capita Capital Expenditure Per Capita Capital Expenditure of NY 10 7.1

3 Is the GLA authorised to raise borrowings without Union Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

4 Is the GLA authorised to make investments without Union Government approval? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

58

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

5 Does the Annual Budget of the GLA have to be approved by the Union Government? NO = 1 YES = 0 10 10

6 Is the GLA required to have a Long term and/or medium term fiscal plan ? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Human Resources7 Does the GLA have the following powers with respect to its employees? 10 8

i Appoint YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

ii Promote YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iii Take Disciplinary Action YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

iv Terminate YES = 0.2 NO = 0 0.2

v Incentivise YES = 0.2 NO = 0 -

8 Do the GLA and the boroughs have adequate staff commensurate with the population within their jurisdiction?(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of employees/100,000 population Corresponding benchmark of NY 20 18.3

III Institutional Structures

9Is there an institutional mechanism that empowers the GLA to control, manage, supervise, intervene, veto, or otherwise influence crucial decisions of other parastatal/civic agencies in respect of their operations in the GLA jurisdiction area in so far as they impact citizens?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

10Has the GLA put in place a Performance Management Information System/alternate decision-support system that institutionalises performance based reviews of/decisions in respect of finances and operations?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Has the GLA put in place a digital governance roadmap? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

12 Does the GLA have an incident management system to deal with emergencies? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Empowered & Legitimate Political RepresentationI Elections

1 Is there an independent/ autonomous organisation that is responsible for delimitation of wards in the city? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Is there a body mandated to conduct local body level elections? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

II Mayor3 Is the Mayor of the city directly elected? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

4 Does the Mayor have a 4 year term? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

5 Does the Mayor and/or the council have the authority to appoint the senior management of the GLA? YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

III Council

6

Is the GLA responsible for providing ten specific and critical functions and services? (out of a total of twenty functions and services arrived at by taking together eighteen functions and services listed under Schedule XII of the 74th CAA and recommendations of the SARC, and eliminating overlapping items)? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

No. of identified major functions performed by the GLA

10 major functions20 18

7Is there a register of interest/ equivalent disclosure i.e. publicly available and widely dis-seminated capturing related party interests, relationships and transactions in respect of councillors?

YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

8 What was the voting percentage in the last Council elections? Actual Voting % 10 3.9

Transparency, Accountability & ParticipationI Transparency

1 Is there a law that mandates public disclosure of activities/ information of Local Govern-ment? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

2 Does the GLA have a comprehensive website? Score as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 8.1

3Does the GLA have an Open Data policy or framework whereby all financial and operational records of the city are made easily accessible to the public through suo motu disclosures, including in electronic form on their websites.

YES = 1 NO = 0 20 20

II Accountability4 Is there a law that provides for a Local Government Level ombudsman? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

59

Q N

o.


Wei

ghta

ge

Wei

ghte

d Sc

ore

5 Is the ombudsman authorized to: 10 10

i Investigate corruption YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

ii Resolve inter-agency disputes YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

6 Does the GLA's External Auditor report to the City Council and/or the State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

7 Is the GLA required by its governing legislation to get its annual accounts audited before expiry of six months from the end of a financial year? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

8 Is the GLA required to respond to observations raised by Auditors within a specified time period? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

9 Is the GLA/ Mayor required to present responses to Auditor's observations in the Council/State Legislature? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

10 Is the GLA required by its governing legislation to carry out an Internal Audit within a prede-termined frequency, at least annual? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

11 Is the GLA required to hold public consultations/facilitate other form of citizen participation in the Annual Budget preparation process? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

12 Is the GLA required by law to comply with Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management targets/thresholds/other provisions? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 -

13 Citizens' Charter 10 2.5

i Is there a Citizens’ charter for the services provided by the GLA? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 0.25

ii Does the Citizens' charter comprehensively describe the levels of service that will be pro-vided? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

iii Does the Citizens' Charter provided timelines for delivery of services provided? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

iv Does the Citizen's' Charter provide protocols for obtaining relief? YES = 0.25 NO = 0 -

14 Online Complaint Management System(OCMS) 10 10

i Is there an online complaint management system of the GLA? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

ii Can a complaint regarding the GLA be processed by this system? YES = 0.5 NO = 0 0.5

15 Ease of Doing Business(Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details) 10 7.5

i What is the time taken (in days) to get a building permission in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 0.7

ii What is the number of procedures to be complied with to construct a building (a ware-house)?

No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 4.2

iii What is the time taken to register a property in the city? No. of days in New York City No. of days in the city 1.0

iv What is the number of procedures complied to register a property? No. of procedures in New York City No. of procedures in the city 1.7

16 Does the GLA maintain a comprehensive database of approvals, certificates and permits granted/issued? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

17 Does the GLA have an e-procurement system? YES = 1 NO = 0 as per Janaagraha Urban G2C Awards 2012 10 10

18 Are the Audited Annual Financial Statements of the GLA available in the public domain including on its website? (Please refer to Explanatory Schedules for additional details)

2011-12 = 1 2010-11 = 0.5

2009-10 = 0.25 Prior Years = 0

20 20

III Citizen Participation

19 Are there structured institutionalised platforms for citizen participation in civic administra-tion, in a tiered manner below the level of the Council? YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

20Does the GLA harness the spirit of volunteerism among its citizens and provide opportuni-ties for citizens to participate in the process of improving the Quality of Life in their cities, thereby also fostering a spirit of community and citizenship?

YES = 1 NO = 0 10 10

Urban Planning & Design 8.8

Urban Capacities & Resources 8.1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 9.3

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 8.1

60

Explanatory Schedules

City Snapshots

# City State UA Popln (Mn) ULB/MC Popln (Mn) Area (Km2)

1 Ahmedabad Gujarat 6.4 5.6 464

2 Bengaluru Karnataka 8.5 8.4 741

3 Chennai Tamil Nadu 8.7 4.7 426

4 Delhi Delhi 16.3 11.0 1,483

5 Hyderabad Andhra Pradesh 7.7 6.8 650

6 Jaipur Rajasthan 3.1 3.1 467

7 Kanpur Uttar Pradesh 2.9 2.8 230

8 Kolkata West Bengal 14.1 4.5 185

9 Mumbai Maharashtra 18.4 12.5 438

10 Pune Maharashtra 5.0 3.1 244

11 Surat Gujarat 4.6 4.5 327

Total 9 states 95.7 67.0 5,655

% of India Urban Population 25.42 17.8

Urban Capacities and ResourcesQuestion 2: What is the Per Capita Capital Expenditure of the ULB?

Notes:

1. Capital Expenditure figures for ULBs sourced from Annual Budget documents.

2. In the case of Pune and Hyderabad, in the absence of availability of Actual 2010-11 data despite several attempts, the best available alternatives have been considered.

3. In the case of Bangalore, given that split of Capital and Revenue items is not provided for the Actual figures, Capital-Revenue ratio of Budget 2012-13 has been aplied on the Actual 2010-11 total. Bangalore in the recent past has had unrealistic budgets. Therefore even the capital expenditure figure considered above is far higher than actuals.

4. In case of New York, Capital Spending of USD 11.4 bn has been converted at Rs 44.72 to a USD, the exchange rate as at 30 June 2011 to arrive at the above Capital Expenditure figure.

Notes: UA - Urban Agglomeration; MC - Municipal Corporation

Capital Expenditure Per Capita Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NY Lon

Capital Expenditure (Rs Crores) 1,269 2,790 365 2,550 565 106 427 644 5,090 1,055 740 17,580 12,400

Population 55,70,585 84,25,970 46,81,087 1,10,07,835 68,09,970 30,73,350 27,67,031 44,48,679 1,24,78,447 31,15,431 44,62,002 82,44,910 81,70,000

Capital Expenditure Per Capita (Rs) 2,278 3,311 780 2,316 830 344 1,544 1,448 4,079 3,386 1,659 21,322 15,177

Score on 10 based on NY as benchmark 1.1 1.6 0.37 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.9 1.6 0.8 10.0 7.1

Reference Year 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11

Basis Actual Derived Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Actual Actual Actual

61

5. In case of London, Capital Spending of GBP 5 bn has been converted at Rs 71.92 to 1 GBP, the exchange rate as at 31 March 2011 to arrive at the above Capital Expenditure figure.

6. Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) adjustment factor of 2.9 has been considered for both USD and GBP.

7. No adjustment has been made for variations in nature and number of functions handled between ULBs.

Capital Expenditure Per Capita Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NY Lon

Capital Expenditure (Rs Crores) 1,269 2,790 365 2,550 565 106 427 644 5,090 1,055 740 17,580 12,400

Population 55,70,585 84,25,970 46,81,087 1,10,07,835 68,09,970 30,73,350 27,67,031 44,48,679 1,24,78,447 31,15,431 44,62,002 82,44,910 81,70,000

Capital Expenditure Per Capita (Rs) 2,278 3,311 780 2,316 830 344 1,544 1,448 4,079 3,386 1,659 21,322 15,177

Score on 10 based on NY as benchmark 1.1 1.6 0.37 1.1 0.4 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.9 1.6 0.8 10.0 7.1

Reference Year 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11 2011-12 2010-11 2010-11 2010-11

Basis Actual Derived Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Actual Actual Actual

62

Question 7: Have four State Finance Commissions (SFC) been constituted by the State Government?

Gujarat Karnataka Tamil Nadu Delhi Andhra Pradesh Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh West Bengal Maharashtra

Ahd/Sur Ban Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum/Pun

First State Finance Commission (SFC)

Date of Constitution 15-09-1994 10-06-1994 23-04-1994 Apr-95 22-06-1994 23-04-1994 22-10-1994 30-05-1994 23-04-1994

Period Covered 1996-97 to 2000-01 1996-97 to 2000-01 1997-98 to 2001-02 Not Available 1997-98 to 1999-00 1995-96 to 1999-00 1997-98 to 2000-01 1996-97 to 2000-01 1994-95 to 1996-97

Second SFC

Date of Constitution 19-11-2003 25-10-2000 03-03-2000 Jan-01 08-12-1998 07-05-1999 25-02-2000 14-07-2000 22-06-1999


Third SFC

Date of Constitution Date not available 28-08-2006 14-12-2004 Oct-04 29-12-2004 15-09-2005 23-12-2004 22-02-2006 15-01-2005

Period Covered 2010-11 to 2014-15 2007-08 to 2011-12 Not Available 2005-06 to 2009-10 2005-06 to 2009-10 2006-07 to 2010-11 2008-09 to 2012-13 2006-07 to 2010-11

Fourth SFC

Date of Constitution Not Constituted Not Constituted 01-12-2009 14-09-2009 Not Constituted 13-04-2011 Constituted Not Constituted Constituted

Period Covered Not Available Not Available Not Available

Question 12: Does the ULB have adequate staff commensurate with the population?

Notes:

1. Number of employees sourced from ULB websites, press articles, other secondary sources.

2. Number of employees for Mumbai, London and New York exclude employees of respective transport agencies.

3. Number of employees for New York and London also exclude number of employees in respective Police departments.

4. Number of employees for Bangalore reckoned as sanctioned posts in the absence of any alterative credible data.

5. Indian ULBs have varying models in respect of full time, contract and outsourced employees especially for solid waste

Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NY Lon

Number of employees in ULB 22,000 17,749 23,538 1,24,388 24,240 11,000 7,600 31,221 1,02,626 17,701 15,906 2,47,917 2,25,100

Population 55,70,585 84,25,970 46,81,087 1,10,07,835 68,09,970 30,73,350 27,67,031 44,48,679 1,24,78,447 31,15,431 44,62,002 82,44,910 81,70,000

Employees per 100,000 population 395 211 503 1,130 356 358 275 702 822 568 356 3,007 2,755

Score on 20 with NY as benchmark 2.6 1.4 3.34 7.5 2.4 2.4 1.8 4.7 5.5 3.8 2.4 20.0 18.3

63

management and sanitation services. Attempts have been made to eliminate any impact of the same on scoring by reckoning the highest probable number quoted out of the various sources referred.

6. Date of employee data varies between cities but generally ranges from 2010 to 2012.

7. Population for all Indian ULBs and also New York and London as per respective Census 2011 data.

Gujarat Karnataka Tamil Nadu Delhi Andhra Pradesh Rajasthan Uttar Pradesh West Bengal Maharashtra

Ahd/Sur Ban Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum/Pun

First State Finance Commission (SFC)

Date of Constitution 15-09-1994 10-06-1994 23-04-1994 Apr-95 22-06-1994 23-04-1994 22-10-1994 30-05-1994 23-04-1994


Second SFC

Date of Constitution 19-11-2003 25-10-2000 03-03-2000 Jan-01 08-12-1998 07-05-1999 25-02-2000 14-07-2000 22-06-1999


Third SFC

Date of Constitution Date not available 28-08-2006 14-12-2004 Oct-04 29-12-2004 15-09-2005 23-12-2004 22-02-2006 15-01-2005

Period Covered 2010-11 to 2014-15 2007-08 to 2011-12 Not Available 2005-06 to 2009-10 2005-06 to 2009-10 2006-07 to 2010-11 2008-09 to 2012-13 2006-07 to 2010-11

Fourth SFC

Date of Constitution Not Constituted Not Constituted 01-12-2009 14-09-2009 Not Constituted 13-04-2011 Constituted Not Constituted Constituted

Period Covered Not Available Not Available Not Available


Number of employees in ULB 22,000 17,749 23,538 1,24,388 24,240 11,000 7,600 31,221 1,02,626 17,701 15,906 2,47,917 2,25,100

Population 55,70,585 84,25,970 46,81,087 1,10,07,835 68,09,970 30,73,350 27,67,031 44,48,679 1,24,78,447 31,15,431 44,62,002 82,44,910 81,70,000

Employees per 100,000 population 395 211 503 1,130 356 358 275 702 822 568 356 3,007 2,755

Score on 20 with NY as benchmark 2.6 1.4 3.34 7.5 2.4 2.4 1.8 4.7 5.5 3.8 2.4 20.0 18.3

64

Empowered and Legitimate Political RepresentationQuestion 7: Is the ULB responsible for providing ten specific and critical functions and services? (Question 6 in case of NYC and Lon)

Notes:

1. Out of the eighteen functions listed under Schedule XII to the Constitution (Seventy-fourth) Amendment Act, 1992 and the five functions recommended by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission for inclusion under the remit of ULBs, we have selected for analysis ten critical functions and services from a citizen Quality of Life standpoint.

Critical Civic Functions and Services Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NY Lon

Urban planning including land use and management a Planning for economic and social development a a a a a a a Roads and bridges a a a a a a a a a a a a Water supply (domestic, industrial and commercial) a a a a a a Fire and emergency services a a a a a a a a Promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects a a a a a Public health, including community health centres/area hospitals a a a a a a a School education a a Traffic management and civic policing activities a a Urban environment management and heritage a a

Total 5 1 1 3 3 4 1 2 4 4 5 10 9

Score on 20 10 2 2 6 6 8 2 4 8 8 10 20 18

Question 4: Does the Mayor of the ULB have a five year term?


Term of the Mayor (In years) 2.5 1 5 1 5 5 5 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4 4

65

Critical Civic Functions and Services Ahd Blr Che Del Hyd Jpr Kpr Kol Mum Pun Sur NY Lon

Urban planning including land use and management a Planning for economic and social development a a a a a a a Roads and bridges a a a a a a a a a a a a Water supply (domestic, industrial and commercial) a a a a a a Fire and emergency services a a a a a a a a Promotion of cultural, educational and aesthetic aspects a a a a a Public health, including community health centres/area hospitals a a a a a a a School education a a Traffic management and civic policing activities a a Urban environment management and heritage a a

Total 5 1 1 3 3 4 1 2 4 4 5 10 9

Score on 20 10 2 2 6 6 8 2 4 8 8 10 20 18


Term of the Mayor (In years) 2.5 1 5 1 5 5 5 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 4 4

66

Transparency, Accountability and ParticipationQuestion 16: Ease of Doing Business (Question 15 in case of NYC and Lon)

Notes:

1. Data sourced from World Bank’s Doing Business in India Report 2012


Dealing with construction permits

Time taken in days to obtain construction permit 144 97 143 144 80 151 NA 258 200 NA NA 27 99

Number of procedures to be dealt with 15 15 15 19 16 19 NA 27 37 NA NA 15 9

Score on 10 based on NY as benchmark

Time taken in days to obtain construction permit 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.4 NA 0.3 0.3 NA NA 1.0 0.7

Number of procedures to be dealt with 10.0 10.0 10.0 7.9 9.4 7.9 NA 5.6 4.1 NA NA 10.0 16.7

Registering Property

Time taken in days to register a property 42 28 48 55 37 24 NA 107 44 NA NA 12 29



Time taken in days to register a property 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.3 NA 0.3 0.7 NA NA 10.0 1.0


67


Dealing with construction permits

Time taken in days to obtain construction permit 144 97 143 144 80 151 NA 258 200 NA NA 27 99



Time taken in days to obtain construction permit 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.4 NA 0.3 0.3 NA NA 1.0 0.7


Registering Property

Time taken in days to register a property 42 28 48 55 37 24 NA 107 44 NA NA 12 29



Time taken in days to register a property 0.7 1.1 0.6 0.5 0.8 1.3 NA 0.3 0.7 NA NA 10.0 1.0


68

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur



Cleanliness 6.71 4.86 5.36 4.83 5.38 5.30 2.96 5.60 5.71 6.44 6.76



Crime and safety 5.57 5.15 5.80 3.70 5.36 5.14 2.14 5.53 5.38 6.66 6.28




Cleanliness 2 9 7 10 6 8 11 5 4 3 1



Crime and safety 4 8 3 10 7 9 11 5 6 1 2


Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur



Cleanliness 14.6 14.9 13.4 12.3 12.8 13.1 11.6 15.5 13.8 13.7 14.9



Crime and safety 13.7 12.3 12.6 12.0 12.7 15.2 13.3 12.5 11.6 15.3 14.3


Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100



Cleanliness 4 3 5 4 4 6 6 3 4 6 2



Crime and safety 5 5 6 5 5 2 4 5 7 1 4


VOICE Survey: Results

Voice of India’s Citizens on Quality of Life

Voice of India’s Citizens on QoL priorities

69

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur


Prevention of building violations 7.2 5.7 6.3 6.4 6.4 5.9 4.9 5.3 6.4 6.0 6.8

Knowledge and Competence of civic officials 6.4 5.3 6.2 6.0 5.9 5.6 4.7 5.5 6.1 5.9 6.9

Adequate number of civic officials 6.5 5.3 6.1 5.7 5.7 5.6 4.6 5.2 5.8 6.0 7.0



Level of sensitivity and commitment of your elected representative 6.0 5.3 5.8 5.3 5.7 5.5 4.1 5.6 5.8 5.9 6.8

Competence of your elected representative 6.0 5.2 5.7 5.3 5.8 5.4 4.0 5.5 5.8 5.7 6.9

Transparency, accuracy and usefulness of annual city budget 6.2 5.2 5.8 5.5 5.6 5.6 3.7 5.1 5.8 5.7 6.9


Category ScoreUrban Planning and Design 7.20 5.78 6.43 6.57 6.51 5.93 5.16 5.33 6.65 6.03 6.87

Urban Capacities & Resources 6.33 5.25 6.10 5.68 5.80 5.62 4.27 5.22 5.79 5.88 6.90

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 6.02 5.26 5.75 5.30 5.72 5.46 4.06 5.55 5.78 5.84 6.86

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 6.17 5.12 5.80 5.24 5.70 5.59 3.57 4.65 5.69 5.55 6.91

Mean Score 6.43 5.35 6.02 5.70 5.93 5.65 4.26 5.19 5.98 5.82 6.88

City-Wise RankingEffectiveness of Master Plan 1 9 6 4 5 8 10 11 3 7 2

Prevention of building violations 1 9 6 4 4 8 11 10 3 7 2

Knowledge and Competence of civic officials 2 10 3 5 6 8 11 9 4 7 1

Adequate number of civic officials 2 9 3 7 6 8 11 10 5 4 1

Effectiveness of civic officials spending the money in a responsible and fair way 2 9 3 8 4 6 11 10 7 5 1

Ability and freedom to raise more funds to meet unmet demands 2 9 3 8 5 7 11 10 6 4 1

Level of sensitivity and commitment of your elected representative 2 10 4 9 6 8 11 7 5 3 1

Competence of your elected representative 2 10 6 9 3 8 11 7 3 5 1

Transparency, accuracy and usefulness of annual city budget 2 9 3 8 7 6 11 10 3 5 1

Level of citizen’s participation in the annual budgeting process 2 8 4 9 3 5 11 10 6 7 1

Category Ranking

Urban Planning and Design 1 9 6 4 5 8 11 10 3 7 2

Urban Capacities & Resources 2 9 3 7 5 8 11 10 6 4 1

Empowered and Legitimate Political Representation 2 10 5 9 6 8 11 7 4 3 1

Transparency, Accountability and Participation 2 9 3 8 4 6 11 10 5 7 1

Overall Ranking 2 9 3 7 5 8 11 10 4 6 1

Voice of India’s Citizens on QoCS

70

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur


Prevention of building violationss 12.8 13.9 13.5 14.5 20.1 12.1 12.0 12.0 14.8 10.5 11.8

Knowledge and Competence of civic officialss 10.4 11.6 11.1 10.9 8.6 10.2 12.2 11.2 10.0 9.6 11.0

Adequate number of civic officialss 9.2 9.4 10.0 9.2 8.5 9.8 10.3 10.4 8.6 10.1 10.8



Level of sensitivity and commitment of your elected representativee 9.0 9.5 8.5 8.1 8.1 9.5 8.9 11.5 9.0 10.2 8.4

Competence of your elected representativee 9.2 9.3 8.5 8.1 8.1 8.9 8.8 10.7 8.3 10.2 9.0

Transparency, accuracy and usefulness of annual city budgett 8.9 6.5 8.4 8.3 6.6 8.4 7.7 7.5 8.0 9.7 8.2


Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

City-Wise RankingEffectiveness of Master Plan 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Prevention of building violationss 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2

Knowledge and Competence of civic officialss 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 4 3 8 3

Adequate number of civic officialss 4 6 4 4 4 4 4 6 5 6 4

Effectiveness of civic officials spending the money in a responsible and fair way 10 4 6 5 7 7 5 7 6 8 5

Ability and freedom to raise more funds to meet unmet demands 9 8 5 6 8 4 7 8 8 10 6

Level of sensitivity and commitment of your elected representativee 6 4 7 8 5 6 6 3 4 3 9

Competence of your elected representativee 4 7 7 8 5 8 7 5 7 3 7

Transparency, accuracy and usefulness of annual city budgett 7 9 9 6 8 9 9 9 9 7 10

Level of citizen’s participation in the annual budget-ing process 8 10 10 10 10 9 10 10 10 3 8

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresSometimes, it may be better to have a long term solution, but may cause inconvenience for a short time

59.3 66.0 49.6 53.0 52.7 48.0 56.8 65.8 56.6 60.0 45.2

Sometimes it is desirable to address an issue immediately but this may not be sustainable in the long run

40.7 34.0 50.4 47.0 47.3 52.0 43.2 34.2 43.4 40.0 54.8

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

City-Wise RankingSometimes, it may be better to have a long term solution, but may cause inconvenience for a short time

4 1 9 7 8 10 5 2 6 3 11

Voice of India’s Citizens on QoCS priorities

Voice of India’s Citizens on long term change in QoCS vs short term fixes

71

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise Scores (%)Agree 83.8 79 57.6 56.6 65.5 83.1 34.2 67.3 62.8 72.5 86.9

Neither agree nor disagree 15.5 14.8 8.5 16.3 27.7 11.6 18.5 20.8 21.9 12.7 12.9

Disagree 0.7 6.2 19.7 23.9 6.7 2.7 41.3 11.8 12.6 14.8 0.2

Dont Know/ Can’t Say (DK/CS) - - 14.2 3.1 0.2 2.6 6 0.2 2.7 - -

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise Scores (%)Agree 61.9 87.1 66 61.5 70.2 78.9 40.9 58.8 65.3 75.9 69.1

Neither agree nor disagree 32 10.2 18.2 20.4 26.5 16.2 30.1 30.5 23.8 12.3 30.1

Disagree 6.0 2.8 3.4 15.4 3.4 2.6 16.9 10.3 7.5 11.8 0.6

DK/ CS - - 12.4 2.7 - 2.3 12.1 0.4 3.5 - 0.2

Citizen outlook on QoL in the next 5 years

Citizen outlook on QoL in the next 10 years

Ahd

Blr

Che

Del

Hyd

Jpr

Kpr

Kol

Mum

Pun

Sur

City-Wise ScoresBase:All Respondents [Un-weighted] 300 400 411 501 399 302 302 500 517 304 300

No effect at all - - - 12.9 - - 1.5 - - - -

2 0.2 0.5 - - - - 0.2 - 0.1 - -

3 0.9 2.2 0.3 - - - 1.6 0.4 0.1 - -

4 1.1 1.4 1.7 0.4 2.6 0.2 1.6 1.9 0.6 0.4 0.7

5 5 1.8 2.9 5.9 24.4 1.9 16.6 19.7 4 2.8 6.8

6 24.2 17.1 5.2 20.4 33 9.8 44.1 26.2 13.8 20.4 28.1

7 30.7 49.9 4.9 25 30.4 18.8 32.7 28.3 39.8 23.8 31.8

8 22.1 24.2 12.7 26.4 9 39.5 1.7 21.4 24.1 43.9 20.5

9 3.4 2.1 17.3 8.9 0.3 20.9 - 1.8 11.3 7.7 4.7

To a very large extent 2.6 - 53.7 0.2 - 8.8 - 0.2 5.1 1 1.7

Don't Know/ Can't say 9.7 0.8 1.4 - 0.4 - - - 1 - 5.8

% Respondents scoring the linkage6+ 83 93 94 81 73 98 79 78 94 97 87

7+ 59 76 89 61 40 88 34 52 80 76 59

8+ 28 26 84 36 9 69 2 23 41 53 27

Mean Score 6.94 6.92 8.94 6.21 6.2 7.94 6.02 6.53 7.37 7.35 6.91

Overall Rank 5 6 1 9 10 2 11 8 3 4 7

Impact of QoCS on QoL

Please write to us at [email protected] for further information on the VOICE Survey

72

Act City Covered

Municipal Corporation ActsBombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 Ahmedabad, Surat

Karnataka Municipal Corporation Acts, 1976 Bangalore

Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 Chennai

The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 Delhi

Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act, 1955 Hyderabad

Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 Jaipur

Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporations Act, 1959 Kanpur

Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 Kolkata

Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 Mumbai

Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 Pune

Global BenchmarksGreater London Authority Act, 1999 London

New York City Charter NYC

Town & Country Planning ActsGujarat Town Planning & Urban Development Act,1976 Ahmedabad, Surat

Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 Bangalore

The Tamil Nadu Town & Country Planning Act, 1971 Chennai

The Delhi Development Act, 1957 Delhi

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority Act, 2008 Hyderabad

Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 Jaipur

Uttar Pradesh (Urban Planning & Development) Act, 1973 Kanpur

West Bengal Town & Country (Planning & Development) Act, 1979 Kolkata

The Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 Mumbai

Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 Pune

Metropolitan Planning Committee ActsWest Bengal Metropolitan Planning Committee Act, 1994 Kolkata

State Finance Commission ActsMaharashtra State Finance Commission Act, 1994 Bombay, Pune

List of Legislations

Notes:

4th Floor, UNI Building, Thimmaiah Road, Vasanth Nagar, Bangalore - 560052Tel: 080-40790400 Fax: 080-41277104

Website: www.janaagraha.org Email: [email protected]

Janaagraha Centre for Citizenship and Democracy

Notes:

“We need to fix our City-Systems to fix our Cities” · Executive Summary ... N R Narayana...

Documents

Transcript of “We need to fix our City-Systems to fix our Cities” · Executive Summary ... N R Narayana...